Post on 05-Aug-2020
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK
POLICY PAPER 2 :
SOCIO-CULTURAL
URBAN
FRAMEWORK
HAB I TAT I I I - 2016
© 2017 United Nations
All rights reserved worldwide
The Habitat III Policy Units and Papers were coordinated by the Habitat III Secretariat. The work was led by
the team comprised of Ana B. Moreno, Wataru Kawasaki, Irwin Gabriel Lopez, Laura Bullon-Cassis, and
Dennis Mwamati. Gratitude should also be expressed to the rest of the Habitat III Secretariat, the interns
and volunteers who supported this process.
The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the
United Nations or its officials or Member States.
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the
expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations concerning the legal status of
any country, territory, city, or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or
boundaries, or regarding its economic system or degree of development. References to names, firms,
commercial products, and processes does not imply their endorsement by the United Nations, and a
failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product, or process is not a sign of disapproval.
Links contained in the present publication are provided for the convenience of the reader and are
correct at the time of issue. The United Nations takes no responsibility for the continued accuracy of that
information or for the content of any external website.
If any questions arise related to the accuracy of information contained in this publication, please refer to
the official document, A/CONF.226/PC.3/15.
An electronic version of this publication, as well as other documents from the Habitat III preparatory
process and the Conference itself, are available for download from the Habitat III website at
www.habitat3.org
The Habitat III Secretariat gratefully acknowledges the Government of Ecuador for the financial support
provided to produce this publication.
This is a United Nations publication issued by the Habitat III Secretariat. Photocopies and reproductions
of excerpts are allowed with proper credits.
Suggested reference for this publication: United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban
Development, Habitat III Policy Papers: Policy Paper 2 Socio-Cultural Urban Framework (New York: United
Nations, 2017), www.habitat3.org
Cover: Photo of La Paz, Bolivia by pikselstock/Shutterstock.com ©
ISBN Volume: 978-92-1-132747-2
ISBN Series: 978-92-1-133392-3
iii
Foreword
The New Urban Agenda was unanimously adopted at the United Nations Conference on Housing and
Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III) in Quito, Ecuador on 20 October 2016. In December
2016, during the sixty-eighth plenary session of the seventy-first General Assembly, all United Nations
Member States endorsed the New Urban Agenda and committed to work together towards a paradigm
shift in the way we plan, build, and manage our cities.
The implementation of the New Urban Agenda is crucial for the achievement of the Sustainable
Development Goals as well as the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. How we envisage and share our
urban spaces ultimately impacts how we address global challenges, and it is in our cities, towns, and
villages where actions must be prioritized and operationalized. Over 30,000 Conference participants
came together in Quito to discuss this common vision for sustainable development and its effective
implementation.
The Habitat III Policy Units were formed to identify policy priorities, critical issues, and challenges,
including structural and policy constraints, which would serve as inputs to the New Urban Agenda. They
were also tasked with developing action-oriented recommendations for its implementation.
Each Policy Unit was led by two organizations and composed of a maximum of 20 experts with different
and cross cutting expertise, each of which were nominated by Member States and stakeholders from
all regions. The experts were drawn from various constituent groups and backgrounds, and their
selection was guided by geographical and gender balance considerations, as well as qualitative criteria
regarding expertise and experience in each relevant policy area.
The Habitat III Policy Papers are the final outcome of the Habitat III Policy Units’ work. The Papers
served as official inputs to the Habitat III process and were a key part of the formulation of the Zero
Draft of the New Urban Agenda. They are also part of the Habitat III legacy and a valuable resource
of information and knowledge that various urban actors may find useful in their work on housing and
sustainable urban development. The exercise that was carried out with Policy Units and Policy Papers
sets a pioneering precedent for future United Nations intergovernmental processes to be not only
informed by, but also based on independent expert knowledge.
iv
I would like to express my appreciation to all policy experts and co-lead organizations who provided
their insight, expertise, and time to develop the Policy Papers. I especially thank the Institut Africain
de Gestion Urbaine (IAGU) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) as Policy Unit 2 co-leaders for their stewardship in coordinating inputs from policy experts
and finalizing the Policy Paper on Socio-Cultural Urban Framework.
I am grateful for the immense dedication and enthusiasm that the co-leaders and policy experts have
shown in taking up the challenge of collecting and consolidating key policy recommendations for
the New Urban Agenda. And I would like to express my gratitude by showcasing their key messages
towards the New Urban Agenda.
Dr. Joan ClosSecretary-General of the United Nations Conference
on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III)
v
Acknowledgements
The Habitat III Secretariat expresses its deep appreciation to Member States that provided financial
support for the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III):
the People’s Republic of China, the Czech Republic, the Republic of Ecuador, the Republic of Finland,
the French Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Indonesia, the Republic of
Kenya, the United Mexican States, the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Slovak Republic, the Republic of
South Africa, and the Kingdom of Spain.
Our gratitude goes out to local and regional governments that financially contributed to the Habitat
III preparatory process and the Conference itself, in a pioneering and unique way: the City Council of
Barcelona, the Municipal Government of Cuenca, the Government of the Federal District of Mexico, the
Government of the State of Mexico, as well as the city of Surabaya.
We would like to convey special appreciation for the Rockefeller Foundation and the United Nations
Environment Programme for their financial contribution to the Habitat III preparatory process and
Conference.
The Habitat III Secretariat would also like to express its gratitude to the organizations and institutions
which supported the Conference with in-kind funds: the Ford Foundation, the Municipality of Tel-Aviv,
the Montreal Metropolitan Community (CMM), and the United Arab Emirates.
We would also like to give special thanks for the in-kind contributions that made the Policy Units a
reality by hosting some of the Expert Group Meetings in 2015 and 2016: the Bartlett Development
Planning Unit (DPU) - University College London, the CAF-Development Bank of Latin America, the
Ford Foundation, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the Korea Research Institute for Human
Settlements (KRIHS), the London School of Economics (LSE Cities), the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD), the Union Internationale des Transports Publics (UITP), the
United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO), the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), the Urban
Innovation Centre – Future Cities Catapult, and the World Bank.
Finally, we would like to convey our most sincere appreciation for the voluntary work of all the Policy Unit
co-lead organizations and their representatives, as well as the Policy Unit experts, who enthusiastically
and generously shared their knowledge in the elaboration of the Habitat III Policy Papers. Their
commitment and extensive time spent preparing the policy recommendations contributed to a vibrant
preparatory process and Conference, and are reflected in the New Urban Agenda.
vi
vii
Contents
Foreword
Acknowledgements
Contents
Acronyms/Abbreviations
Introduction
Policy Unit 2 co-lead organizations and co-leaders
Policy Unit 2 expert members
Executive summary
I. Vision and framework of the policy paper’s contribution to the New Urban Agenda
A. Towards people-centred cities
B. Place-based urban identities
C. Inclusive, safe and human-scale built environments
D. Cities conducive to social cohesion and respect for diversity
E. Culture-based urban development
II. Policy challenges
A. Persistent urban inequalities contribute to social and spatial fragmentation
B. Increasing threats to urban heritage and cultural diversity undermine social cohesion and urban resilience
C. Homogenization of urban environments threatens cultural diversity and promotes social exclusion
D. Lack of coherence between cultural and urban policies threatens urban sustainability
E. Cultural rights remain overlooked or insufficiently respected
F. Communities should be strongly supported to contribute to urban planning and management
G. The built environment should be designed in ways that ensure security and foster inclusion
H. Building local capacities and harnessing human capital is a key challenge for cities
I. Access to cultural and communication resources remains insufficient
J. The potential of migrations for urban development should be further recognized and enhanced
................................................................................................................................................iii
..................................................................................................................................v
................................................................................................................................................vii
...........................................................................................................................ix
............................................................................................................................................1
...................................................................................15
.................................................................................................................18
................................................................................................................................26
..................................27
......................................................................................................27
........................................................................................................27
......................................................................28
..........................................................28
................................................................................................28
................................................................................................................................28
.....................................28
......................................................................................................29
............................................................................................................29
...............................................................................................................................29
...........................................................29
.........................................................................................................................30
............................................................................................................................30
.........................................................................................................................................30
..............................................30
............................................................................................................31
viii
III. Prioritizing policy options: transformative actions for the New Urban Agenda
A. Prioritize participatory and people-centred policymaking processes
B. Foster place-based and culturally sensitive urban governance
C. Incorporate culture and creativity in planning instruments and strategies
D. Promote access to culture and respect for cultural rights of all
E. Strengthen cultural components in education and capacity-building programmes and strategies
F. Broaden awareness and foster recognition of cultural diversity through media and technology
G. Recognize and foster the potential of migration for urban development
H. Ensure security and counter urban violence through urban policies
IV. Key actors for action: enabling institutions
A. Central government/national authorities
B. Local government/authorities
C. Civil society
D. Academia
E. Media
F. International organizations
G. Private sector
V. Policy design, implementation and monitoring
VI. Conclusion
Annex I. Key reference documents
Appendix A. Policy Units selection process and criteria
Appendix B. Terms of reference for co-lead organizations
Appendix C. Terms of reference for Policy Unit experts
Appendix D. Policy Paper Framework template
Appendix E. Policy Paper template
Appendix F. Web links to Policy Unit 2 background documents
List of Figures
Figure 1. Habitat III Strategic Framework
Figure 2. Expected accomplishments for the Habitat III Policy area
Figure 3. Habitat III Thematic Framework
Figure 4. Habitat III Policy Units co-lead organizations
Figure 5. Habitat III Policy Units list of Expert Group Meetings
Figure 6. Policy Units’ role in the Habitat III Strategic Framework
..........................................31
................................................32
........................................................32
........................................32
.......................................................32
..........................................................................................................33
...................................................................................................................33
...........................................33
.................................................34
...........................................................................................34
........................................................................................34
........................................................................................................34
.................................................................................................................................34
....................................................................................................................................34
.........................................................................................................................................35
.............................................................................................................35
...............................................................................................................................35
.......................................................................................35
........................................................................................................................................41
..........................................................................................................46
.............................................................................52
.........................................................................55..............................................................................57
.........................................................................................60
...........................................................................................................64
..................................................................65
....................................................................................................2...............................................................3
...................................................................................................4
.................................................................................6......................................................................7
...............................................................12
ix
Acronyms/Abbreviations
CMM Montreal Metropolitan Community
DPU Bartlett Development Planning Unit of the University College London
ESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
IAGU Institut Africain de Gestion Urbaine of Senegal
ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites
ICT Information and Communications Technology
IDB Inter-American Development Bank
IDRC International Development Research Centre
IFACCA International Federation of Arts Councils and Cultural Agencies
ILO International Labour Organization
INU National Institute of Urban Planning of Italy
IOM International Organization for Migration
ISOCARP International Society of City and Regional Planners
KRIHS Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements
LSE London School of Economics
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
OHCHR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
SEWA Self-Employed Women Association
UCLG United Cities and Local Governments
UITP Union Internationale des Transports Publics
UNAIDS Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UN Environment United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UN-Habitat United Nations Human Settlements Programme
UNHCR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
UNISDR United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UNIFEM United Nations Development Fund for Women [transferred to UN-Women]
WHO World Health Organization
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 2x
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 1
Introduction
Technical expertise towards
the New Urban Agenda
The United Nations General Assembly decided to convene the United Nations Conference on Housing
and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III) in October 2016, in Quito, Ecuador, to reinvigorate the
global commitment to sustainable urbanization, and to focus on the implementation of the New Urban
Agenda with a set of global standards of achievement in sustainable urban development.
The Habitat III Conference and its preparatory process provided a unique opportunity to bring together
diverse urban actors, particularly local authorities, to contribute to the development of the New Urban
Agenda in the new global development context after the historic adoption of the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development and its Goals, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and other global
development agreements and frameworks.
In September 2014, during the first session of the Habitat III Preparatory Committee (PrepCom1) held
in New York at the United Nations headquarters, the Secretary-General of the Conference, Dr. Joan
Clos, presented a report1 on the preparations for the Conference and launched an innovative, inclusive,
and action-oriented preparatory process carried out in four areas: knowledge, engagement, policy, and
operations.
In the same report, paragraph 68, it is noted that the work of several Policy Units on thematic areas
could facilitate the collection of inputs to the Habitat III preparatory process in an innovative way,
ensuring the participation of all actors in the composition of those units.
1 A/CONF.226/PC.1/4
A Habitat III Strategic Framework was developed based on these four areas, while linkages among the
four areas were guided by the principles of innovation and inclusiveness requested by Member States.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 22
FIGURE 1. HABITAT III STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK
KNOWLEDGE
MONITORING
RESEARCH
DATA
INFORMATION
Capturing knowledge
Creating knowledge
Organize/access knowledge
Use knowledge Disseminate dataCapacity building
OPERATIONS
FINANCE
LOGISTICS
TransparencyAccountabilityEfficiencyEffectiveness
InnovationCreativityEvent Footprint
United Nations Task Team, General Assembly of Partners, Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments, Urban Breakfasts, Urban Walks, Urban Journalism Academies
ENGAGEMENT
PARTICIPATION
PARTNERSHIP
ADVOCACY AND OUTREACH
COMMUNICATIONS
Ensuring inclusive debate
Sharing urban solutions
Building consensus
Raising awareness
POLICY
COMMITMENT
PROCESS
ACTION
CHANGE
Securing renewedpolitical commitment
Assessing accomplishment to date
Addressing poverty
Identifiying new and emerging challenges
Policy Units, Regional and Thematic Meetings
United Nations Task Team,Regional participation,National participation
EXPECTEDACCOMPLISHMENTS
EXPECTEDACCOMPLISHMENTS
EXPECTEDACCOMPLISHMENTS
EXPECTEDACCOMPLISHMENTS
IMPLEMENTATION
Policy Papers, Regional and Thematic Declarations
OUTCOMES
IMPLEMENTATION
IMPLEMENTATION
Habitat III Trust Fund,Habitat III Village,National Organizing Committee,Participatory process
IMPLEMENTATION
Increased numbers of engaged stakeholders and local governments
OUTCOMES
Resources mobilized,Innovative operational model,Legacy projects
OUTCOMES
Issue Papers, National Reports, Regional Reports
OUTCOMES
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 3
Age-balanced approach
PROCESS PRINCIPLES
Regional balance of experts in each Policy UnitExpert Group Meetings organized around the world
Policy Paper FrameworksMember States, stakeholders and United Nations system comments to the Policy Papers FrameworksPolicy PapersRegional DeclarationsThematic Declarations
FIGURE 2. EXPECTED ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR THE HABITAT III POLICY AREA
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 24
Establishment of the Policy Units After PrepCom1, which took place in September 2014, from October to December 2014, the Bureau
of the Preparatory Committee proposed the Habitat III Thematic Framework with six thematic areas, 22
Issue Papers and ten Policy Units.
THE NEW URBAN AGENDA
ISSUE PAPERS AND POLICY UNITS MATRIX
AREAS ISSUE PAPERS
1. Social Cohesion and Equity –Livable Cities
2. Urban Frameworks
3. Spatial Development
4. Urban Economy
5. Urban Ecology andEnvironment
6. Urban Housing and BasicServices
1. Inclusive cities (a.o. Pro‐poor, Gender,Youth, Ageing)2. Migration and refugees in urban areas3. Safer Cities4. Urban Culture and Heritage
5. Urban Rules and Legislation6. Urban Governance7. Municipal Finance
8. Urban and Spatial Planning and Design9. Urban Land10. Urban-rural linkages
12. Local Economic Development13. Jobs and Livelihoods14. Informal Sector
15. Urban Resilience16. Urban Ecosystems and ResourceManagement17. Cities and Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management
18. Urban Infrastructure and Basic Services,including energy19. Transport and Mobility20. Housing21. Smart Cities22. Informal Settlements
1. Right to the City and Cities for All2. Socio‐Cultural Urban Framework
3. National Urban Policies4. Urban Governance, Capacity andInstitutional Development5. Municipal Finance and Local FiscalSystems
6. Urban Spatial Strategies: Land Market and Segregation
7. Urban Economic DevelopmentStrategies
8. Urban Ecology and Resilience
9. Urban Services and Technology10. Housing Policies
POLICY UNITS
11. Public Space
FIGURE 3. HABITAT III THEMATIC FRAMEWORK
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 5
At the second session of the Habitat III Preparatory Committee (PrepCom2), held in April 2015 in
Nairobi, Kenya, at the headquarters of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat),
Member States called upon participating States to support the work of the Policy Units with a goal
of facilitating the elaboration of policy recommendations which would contribute, together with the
inputs from broad regional and thematic consultations among all stakeholders, to the Bureau of the
Preparatory Committee’s work in preparing the draft outcome document of the Conference.2
On 8 May 2015, in his capacity as Secretary-General of the Conference and pursuant to the request
by Member States to select technical experts -- keeping a balance between Government-nominated
technical experts and others and guided by the need for equitable geographical representation and
gender balance -- Dr. Joan Clos sent an official letter encouraging Member States of the United Nations
to support the work of the Policy Units by nominating suitably qualified technical experts to constitute
ten Policy Units in order to facilitate the elaboration of policy recommendations. Stakeholders were
also invited to nominate experts. The terms of reference for co-lead organizations and experts were
shared on the Habitat III website, as well as the selection process and criteria details (see Appendixes
A, B and C).
Over 700 nominations were received from Member States as well as stakeholders’ organizations,
including experts from academia, national and local governments, civil society, and other regional
and international bodies. A selection process based on the set criteria such as expertise, gender
balance, and geographical representation was completed in close consultation with the Bureau of the
Preparatory Committee.
A total of 20 appointed organizations, two per Policy Unit, were selected based on their expertise in
the subject area given the specific topic of the Policy Unit, participation and engagement in other
intergovernmental processes and/or global development frameworks, and diversity in their constituent
groups. The co-lead organizations also contributed technical, financial, or in-kind support to the work
of the Policy Units.
A maximum of 20 experts per Policy Unit were also selected, including at least one expert on gender
issues and one on children and youth. Each Policy Unit had at least one expert from a Least Developed
Country.
2 See 1/1205 resolution at A/CONF.226/PC.2/6.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 26
AREAS POLICY UNITS CO-LEAD ORGANIZATIONS
1. Social Cohesion and Equity –
Livable Cities1. Right to the City, and Cities
for All
• ActionAid
• CAF-Development Bank of Latin America
2. Socio-Cultural Urban
Framework
• Institut Africain de Gestion Urbaine of Senegal (IAGU)
• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO)
2. Urban Frameworks 3. National Urban Policies • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
• United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat)
4. Urban Governance, Capacity
and Institutional Development
• LSE Cities, London School of Economics and Political Science
• United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), facilitating the Global
Taskforce
5. Municipal Finance and Local
Fiscal Systems
• Lincoln Institute of Land Policy
• World Bank
3. Spatial Development 6. Urban Spatial Strategy: Land
Market and Segregation
• National Institute of Urban Planning of Italy (INU)
• Urban Planning Society of China (UPSC)
4. Urban Economy 7. Urban Economic Development
Strategies
• Bartlett Development Planning Unit (DPU) - University College London
• Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements (KRIHS)
5. Urban Ecology and Environment 8. Urban Ecology and Resilience • The Rockefeller Foundation
• United Nations Environment Programme (UN Environment)
6. Urban Housing and Basic
Services
9. Urban Services and Technology • Association of German Cities
• Union International des Transports Publics (UITP)
10. Housing Policies • Habitat for Humanity
• Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
FIGURE 4. HABITAT III POLICY UNITS CO-LEAD ORGANIZATIONS
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 7
FIGURE 5 - HABITAT III POLICY UNITS LIST OF EXPERT GROUP MEETINGS
Policy Unit
City/Country Dates Hosted by
Policy Unit 1 Lima, Peru 24-25 November 2015 CAF-Development Bank of Latin America
Bogota, Colombia 27-28 January 2016 CAF-Development Bank of Latin America
Policy Unit 2 New York, USA 25-27 January 2016 The Ford Foundation
Paris, France 22-25 February 2016 UNESCO
Policy Unit 3 Paris, France 12-13 November 2015 OECD
Incheon, Republic of Korea
15-16 December 2015 UN-Habitat; Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements (KRIHS)
Policy Unit 4 London, UK 15-16 December 2015 LSE Cities, London School of Economics and Political Science
Barcelona, Spain 10-12 February 2016 United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), facilitating the Global Taskforce
Policy Unit 5 Washington DC, USA 20-22 January 2016 World Bank
London, UK 15-16 February 2016 Urban Innovation Centre – Future Cities Catapult
Policy Unit 6 Barcelona, Spain 16-17 November 2015 UN-Habitat
New York, USA 4-5 February 2016 The Ford Foundation
Policy Unit 7 London, UK 3-4 December 2015 Bartlett Development Planning Unit (DPU) - University College London
London, UK 9-10 February 2016 Urban Innovation Centre – Future Cities Catapult
Policy Unit 8 Bangkok, Thailand 23-24 November 2015 The Rockefeller Foundation
Paris, France 25-26 January 2016 OECD
Policy Unit 9 Barcelona, Spain 17-18 November 2015 UN-Habitat
Brussels, Belgium 11-12 February 2016 Union Internationale des Transports Publics (UITP)
Policy Unit 10 Barcelona, Spain 19-20 November 2015 UN-Habitat
Washington DC, USA 27-29 January 2016 Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
The Habitat III Secretariat and the co-leaders organized several virtual meetings throughout the work of
the Policy Units from September 2015 until the end of February 2016 in order to strengthen coordination,
clarify matters of the required work, and prepare for the face-to-face Expert Group Meetings, and for
more substantive discussions and decision-making on the contents of the Policy Papers.
A total of 20 Policy Unit Expert Group Meetings were organized from November 2015 to February
2016, and hosted by some of the co-lead organizations or key partners of the Habitat III preparatory
process. Participants of the Expert Group Meetings were composed of policy experts and co-leaders
and coordinated by the Habitat III Secretariat.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 28
First outcome: Policy Paper Frameworks
All the Policy Units identified challenges, policy priorities, and critical issues as well as developed
action-oriented recommendations for the implementation of the New Urban Agenda. The Policy Paper
Framework was based on the template provided by the Habitat III Secretariat (see Appendices D and
E) and submitted by the end of December 2015. It was also published online on the Habitat III website.
Official comments on the ten Policy Paper Frameworks by Member States and stakeholders were
received by the end of January 2016, and also made available on the Habitat III website as a contribution
to the policy process towards Habitat III. The co-lead organizations and experts took the feedback and
comments into consideration to further work on the elaboration of the Policy Papers.
Comments from the perspective of the United Nations were also shared by the United Nations system
through the United Nations Task Team on Habitat III (see Appendix F).
FROM MEMBER STATES
• Argentina
• Brazil
• Colombia
• Ecuador
• European Union and Member States
• Finland
• France
• Germany
• Japan
• Mexico
• Myanmar
• Netherlands (the)
• Norway
• Russian Federation (the)
• Senegal
• Thailand
• United States of America (the)
FROM STAKEHOLDERS
• Caritas International
• Ecoagriculture Partners
• Habitat International Coalition
• Helpage International
• Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
• Institute for Housing and Urban Studies, Erasmus
University of Rotterdam
• International Council for Science and Future Earth
• Techo
• Union for International Cancer Control
• World Future Council
• World Resources Institute
• World Wildlife Fund
FROM UN AGENCIES
• OHCHR
• UN Environment
• UN-Habitat
• UNISDR
• UN-Women
• WHO
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 9
Finalization of the Policy Papers
Throughout the Expert Group Meetings, all ten Policy Papers were finalized and delivered by the Policy
Units on 29 February 2016, and published on the Habitat III website. The Policy Papers were the
result of collective efforts from the co-leaders and experts who had countless virtual and face-to-face
discussions, resulting in critical and action-oriented policy recommendations to feed into the New
Urban Agenda.
A formal handover of the Policy Papers to the Secretary-General of the Conference and the Bureau
of the Habitat III Preparatory Committee took place during the Habitat III Europe Regional Meeting in
Prague, Czech Republic, on Friday, 17 March 2016.
Representatives of the Policy Unit co-leaders and experts met with the Secretary-General of the
Conference as well as the Bureau of the Preparatory Committee, and co-lead organizations of the
Policy Units were thanked for their dedicated work and support, while the experts of all ten Policy Units
were commended for their tireless efforts and the expertise they demonstrated in finalizing the Policy
Papers.
Intersessional Process towards theZero Draft of the New Urban Agenda
Policy Units were further involved as headway was being made in preparations for Habitat III. Furthering
its vision for the preparatory process and for the Habitat III Conference to be carried out in an inclusive,
efficient, effective, and improved manner, the General Assembly, in its resolution A/70/210, decided to
organize five days of Open-Ended Informal Consultative Meetings before the submission of the Zero
Draft of the New Urban Agenda in order to provide an opportunity for feedback on the conclusions of
the Habitat III Policy Units and the Habitat III Regional and Thematic Meetings.
As part of the Intersessional Process, the Secretary-General of the Conference convened the Policy
Units at the Habitat III Open-Ended Informal Consultative Meetings, which took place from 25 to 29
April 2016 at the United Nations headquarters in New York. The meeting brought together over 500
participants representing relevant stakeholders, international organizations, the United Nations system,
and governments, more than 120 of which were Policy Unit experts and co-leaders from the respective
organizations who participated and acted as moderators, presenters, and panelists over the period of
five-day consultations.
The meeting was organized with daily themes on regional perspectives; transformative commitments
for sustainable urban development; effective implementation; and how to enhance means of
implementation. Co-leaders, in particular, played a significant role in organizing and leading each panel
discussion in coordination with the Habitat III Secretariat. Panels aimed to examine the recommendations
and outputs of the Policy Papers.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 210
The formal handover of the Policy Papers at the Habitat III Europe Regional Meeting in Prague, Czech Republic
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 11
The Habitat III Conference: Policy directions towards the implementation of the New Urban Agenda
Apart from the elaboration of the Policy Papers, the Policy Units continued to contribute to the next
stages of the Habitat III process, with their feedback and the Policy Papers actively resonating throughout
the development of the outcome document that ultimately articulated the New Urban Agenda at the
Habitat III Conference.
With the agreed New Urban Agenda, Policy Dialogue sessions were organized with the leadership of
the co-lead organizations during the Habitat III Conference in Quito from 17 to 20 October 2016. The
co-lead organizations developed a concept note for the Policy Dialogues which aimed to provide rich
and innovative discussions and conversations on the theme of the Conference based on the elaborated
recommendations of the respective Policy Papers. The Policy Dialogues, with a particular action-
oriented focus on the implementation of the New Urban Agenda, were able to mobilize a variety of
actors from all over the world, and provided a unique space to discuss the Policy Units thematic areas.
A unique legacy
The Policy Papers, due to the dedicated work of the Policy Units, were the building blocks of the New
Urban Agenda, and contributed to the participatory, innovative, and inclusive manner in which the
Conference in Quito took place. The creation of the Policy Units has played a key role in opening new
opportunities to build on and to increase the relevance of sustainable urban development as a priority
among Member States, the United Nations system, local governments, stakeholders, and other key
urban players to implement the New Urban Agenda and achieve its goals together.
FIGURE 6. POLICY UNITS’ ROLE IN THE HABITAT III STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK
Policy was one of the four conceptualized areas, along with knowledge, engagement, and operations, in the Habitat III strategic framework, which laid out the efforts necessary to achieve the goals and objectives of the Habitat III Conference and its preparatory process.
The Policy Area, composed of Policy Units and Regional and Thematic Meetings (see Figure 1), played an important role in providing significant substantive inputs during the Habitat III preparatory process and the formulation of the New Urban Agenda.
The Policy Units brought together 200 experts and 20 co-lead organizations recognized as authorities on sustainable urban development to create ten Policy Papers, which resulted in key building blocks of the New Urban Agenda in an inclusive, innovative, and participatory manner.
Apart from the results of the Policy Units in the Policy Area, each of the Habitat III strategic areas maximized its synergy effect and its role by interacting across and interlinking among the other three areas, ensuring that the entire process in the run up to the Habitat III Conference was integrated. This figure demonstrates how the Policy Units enabled the successful work of the Policy Area, while complementing and contributing to the other areas, with the active involvement of Member States, the United Nations system, local governments, stakeholders, and other key urban experts.
Multidisciplinary approach in each
Policy Unit
Co-lead organizations and experts recognized as authorities on topics relevant
to sustainable urban development
Research and data on sustainable urban development as basis for the preparation
of the Policy Papers
Habitat III Issue Papers as background documents for the Policy Papers leading to Special Sessions at the Conference
Multi-stakeholder approach
Least Developed Countries represented in each Policy Unit
Gender mainstreaming and at least one gender expert in each Policy Unit
Policy Papers’ recommendations as well as Member States’ and Stakeholders’ comments on
them, as official inputs to the Zero Draft of the New Urban Agenda
Policy Units co-leaders and experts presented their recommendations
at Open-Ended Informal Consultative Meetings as final
interventions prior to the intergovernmental negotiations
Policy Units as basis for Policy Dialogues
at the Conferencein Quito
Co-lead organizations contributing to the Habitat III Trust Fund
HABITAT III KNOWLEDGE AREA
Co-lead organizations providing in-kind contributions to the Policy Units process
All experts engaged on a pro-bono basis, with only travel expenses covered
Age-balanced in each Policy Unit, which included at least one expert on children and youth issues
HA
BIT
AT III O
PERAT
IONS
AREA
HABITAT III ENGAG
EMEN
T A
REA
Gender inclusive with a gender balance among the Policy Unit experts
Geographical diversity of the co-leadorganizations
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 214
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 15
Policy Unit 2 on Socio-Cultural Urban Framework
Co-Lead Organizations
INSTITUT AFRICAIN DE GESTION URBAINE (IAGU)
The IAGU is an international NGO specializing in research and development, technical support, training and
information. Created in 1987, IAGU comes under the aegis of the African Foundation for Urban Management (Fagu).
Its main mission is to support municipalities and the authorities of the cities of West and Central Africa to strengthen
their planning and management capabilities to improve local governance, promote sustainable management of the
environment and the fight against poverty.
www.iagu.org
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION (UNESCO)
UNESCO is a specialized agency of the United Nations, gathering 195 Member States and 10 Associate Members. It
aims to build peace and promoting sustainable development through its five major programmes: Education, Natural
Sciences, Social and Human Sciences, Culture, Communication and Information. UNESCO functions as a laboratory
of ideas and a standard-setter to forge international agreements on a wide range of issues. It also serves as a
clearinghouse for the dissemination and sharing of information and knowledge, while helping Member States to
build their human and institutional capacities in diverse fields. In the field of Culture, it aims at safeguarding and
promoting heritage in all its forms, preserving natural heritage, and fostering creativity and the diversity of cultural
expressions.
www.unesco.org
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 216
Co-leaders1
INSTITUT AFRICAIN DE GESTION URBAINE (IAGU)
Oumar CisséExecutive Secretary
Dr. Cissé is a civil engineer who holds a master’s degree in Environmental Studies and a PhD in Planning and Environment from the University of Montreal. Since 1997, Mr. Cissé has served as the Executive Secretary of the African Institute for Urban Management (IAGU). His previous positions included a stint as a municipal engineer and environmentalist at the urban community of Dakar, where Mr. Cissé founded the sub-directorate of the environment in 1992. Dr. Cissé is a researcher in urban environments and specializes in issues of urban waste. Dr. Cissé has trained African professionals in urban areas as a lecturer at the Institute of Urban Planning at the University of Montreal since 2000, and as an associate professor at the international French-language Senghor University in Alexandria, Egypt since April 2007. Dr. Cissé has acted as an international consultant (with UNDP, CIDA, UN-Habitat) and has authored several articles and international communications in urban environment. Dr. Cissé has also served as the President of the Network of African Institutions Urban Management (ANUMI) since 2003, and was the Coordinator of the Regional Centre of the Basel Convention on hazardous waste in French-speaking Africa from 2004 to 2006. Dr. Cissé’s main areas of intervention are municipal waste, environmental planning, public/private partnership in urban services, urban agriculture, and international cooperation in urban areas.
UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION (UNESCO)
Francesco Bandarin Assistant Director-General for Culture, UNESCO
From 2000 to 2010, Mr. Bandarin was the Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the Secretary of the World Heritage Convention. From 2010 to 2014, Mr. Bandarin served as the Assistant Director-General of UNESCO for Culture. Mr. Bandarin was re-appointed to this position for an interim period until February 2018. In 2014, Mr. Bandarin was appointed the President of the Jury of the Venice Architecture Biennale, curated by Rem Koolhaas and the President of the Jury of the First Shenzhen Creative Design Award (SCDA). Mr. Bandarin is the President of the Italian Association of Historic Cities (ANCSA), a member of the Visiting Committee of the Getty Conservation Institute in Los Angeles and a member of the Steering Committee of the Aga Khan Award for Architecture. Mr. Bandarin holds degrees in Architecture (IUAV Venice) and City and Regional Planning (UC Berkeley), and has been a professor of Urban Planning and Urban Conservation at the University of Venice (IUAV) from 1980 to 2000. Mr. Bandarin’s recent publications include: The Historic Urban Landscape: Managing Heritage in an Urban Century (2012) and Reconnecting the City. The Historic Urban Landscape Approach and the Future of Urban Heritage (2015), both of which were published by Wiley-Blackwell.
1 All biographies of the co-leaders and experts are as of the date of the establishment of the Policy Units in September 2015.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 17
Dorine DuboisCoordinator for Culture and Development, UNESCO
Ms. Dubois is responsible for the coordination of the UNESCO culture and development initiatives, and the cooperation with the United Nations, international organizations, and external partners, in the Executive Office of the Assistant Director-General for Culture of UNESCO. Specialized in international and European law and political studies (College of Europe, Belgium), Ms. Dubois began her career at UNESCO in 2000 in the External Relations Sector, then worked at the European Commission’s Directorate General for Justice and Home Affairs, and joined UNESCO again in 2003 as a Liaison Officer in the Office of the Deputy Assistant Director-General for External Relations. Ms. Dubois then worked for six years as the Executive Officer of the Bureau of the Budget, where she coordinated the negotiations of a harmonized budgetary policy within the United Nations. In 2010, Ms. Dubois joined the Executive Office of the Assistant Director-General for Culture. Ms. Dubois has notably led the team in charge of the UNESCO Global Report on Culture for Sustainable Urban Development and is mandated with the coordination of the UNESCO contribution to the Habitat III process in the field of Education, Culture, the Natural Sciences, and Social and Human Sciences. In addition, since 2015, Ms. Dubois has been the Special Assistant of H.E. Mr. Simataa, President of the General Conference of UNESCO, and advises him in the framework of the current reform of the governance of UNESCO.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 218
Experts of Policy Unit 2 on Socio-Cultural Urban Framework
Ana Lucy BengocheaCoordinator of the Community Practitioners Platform on Resilience and WaguchaMs. Bengochea is the coordinator of the Community Practitioner Platform on Resilience in Honduras and is also the community organizer in empowering women and youth through cultural and environmental restoration, disaster reconstruction, and collective sustainable livelihood projects. Ms. Bengochea is a member of GROOTS International.
Stephen BerrisfordAssociate Professor, African Centre for Cities at the University of Cape TownMr. Berrisford previously held the post of Director of the Land Development Facilitation at the National Department of Land Affairs, and worked in the planning departments of the Cape Town and Johannesburg municipalities. Mr. Berrisford established Stephen Berrisford Consulting in 2000, and his clients include major international development agencies as well as South Africa Government entities. Mr. Berrisford’s work focuses on practical and legal solutions to the challenges of rapid urban growth in Sub-Saharan Africa. Mr. Berrisford has regularly published academic articles and book chapters since 1996, and has presented papers at a wide range of international conferences.
Sonia Maria DiasWaste Sector Specialist, Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO)Ms. Dias has extensive experience as a researcher and as a consultant in solid waste management. Ms. Dias is a sector specialist at WIEGO, and her consulting experience focused on social mobilization, coordination of partnerships, empowerment of sector unions, and informal sector integration. Ms. Dias has extensive knowledge of the conditions under which informal sectors may successfully be integrated in the waste management sector to raise recycling rates and save costs for municipalities and end-users. Ms. Dias is the Latin American representative for the Collaborative Working Group on Solid Waste (CWG) and member of the Observatory for Inclusive Recycling and an Eisenhower fellow.
Lucy EarleUrban SpecialistMs. Earle is currently leading the UK Government’s Urban Crises Programme, and is a Post-Doctoral fellow from the African Centre for Cities at the University of Cape Town. Ms. Earle worked for UN-Habitat in Nairobi on the evaluation of gender mainstreaming across programming, as well as doing research within the UN on the work of the UN system on gender equality and women’s empowerment. Ms. Earle is also an urban technical adviser for the UK’s Department for International Development and has published a series of academic articles in high profile urban and development studies journals.
Alev ErkiletProfessor, Sakarya UniversityMs. Erkilet is a sociologist who completed her PhD with Acettepe University in Ankara. From 1987 to 2000 she was an assistant professor at the University of Kırıkkale. Ms. Erkilet worked for the Istanbul Metropolitan Planning Office as a sociologist and has published numerous academic articles and essays on Islamism, modernity, urban issues, and social movements, and her areas of research include social change, modernization processes, and political sociology.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 19
Ana Liz FloresHuairou CommissionMs. Flores is an international consultant specializing in local development, sustainable natural resources management, and climate change adaptation. Ms. Flores coordinates the action research on community resilience priorities in the post–HFA (Hyogo Framework for Action) Agenda, and has multilaterally worked with transnational organization for design and implementation of sustainable development with the Development Bank of Latin America, the World Bank, and the European Union.
Maryam HaririVice-President at Ogilvy & Mathers, Senior Community Engagement and Risk Communication Advisor, FEMA, and Adjunct Professor, New York UniversityMs. Hariri is the Vice-President at Ogilvy & Mathers and serves as the Senior Community Engagement and Risk Communication lead at FEMA Region IX, which includes California, Arizona, Nevada, Hawaii, and Pacific Islands. Prior to joining Ogilvy, Ms. Hariri led hazard mitigation and resilience planning efforts at the city of New York where she helped to create innovative post-Hurricane Sandy programs for the Mayor’s Office, the Department of City Planning, and the Office of Emergency Management. Ms. Hariri is an Adjunct Professor at New York University, teaching courses on flood risk management in coastal cities, social vulnerability, and food systems resilience in the Department of Environmental Studies and Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health. Ms. Hariri sits on numerous international and local expert committees and working groups, including the Habitat III Policy Expert Committee, International Rescue Committee Urban Expert Group, and NYU’s Food and City Working Group. Ms. Hariri is an urban planner by training with B.A and M.A. degrees from UC Berkeley and New York University.
Jyoti HosagraharUNESCO Chair for Culture, HabitatMs. Hosagrahar is a professor at the GSAPP, Columbia University, New York where she directs the Sustainable Urbanism International Lab that is an NGO in India. Ms. Hosagrahar is also UNESCO Chair Professor in Culture, Habitat, and Sustainable Development at Srishti Institute of Art, Design, and Technology in India where she is also Chair of the PhD program. Ms. Hosagrahar served as an expert member of the national Advisory Committee for World Heritage under the Ministry of Culture, Government of India (2011-2015). Since 2006 Ms. Hosagrahar has served as a technical expert for UNESCO on historic cities, culture and development, and urban sustainability. Ms. Hosagrahar has worked closely with the World Heritage Center and the Culture Sector at UNESCO in the drafting of the Historic Urban Landscapes Recommendation. Ms. Hosagrahar is also on the UNESCO Expert Group for World Heritage and Sustainable Development. Ms. Hosagrahar serves on the Executive Committee of ICOMOS India member of the ICOMOS International Scientific Committee for Theory and Philosophy (Theophil) and Historic Towns and Cities (CIVVIH). Since 2010 has been involved with UNESCO’s efforts in Culture and Development authoring the brochure “Power of Culture for Development” for the MDG Review meeting in New York in 2010, a strategy paper on Culture and Development for the Culture Sector of UNESCO in 2012. Ms. Hosagrahar is a Global Advisor for the UN Global Compact Cities Program, co-author of the Policy paper for “Operationalizing Culture in the Sustainable Development of Cities” for Gold IV of the UN United Cities and Local Governments, and an Expert Group member on Public Space with UN-Habitat.
Nazrul IslamChairman Centre for Urban StudiesMr. Islam received his B.A. (Hons.) and M.A. in Geography from the University of Dhaka and was also educated at the University of Western Ontario, London, Canada; the East-West Center, Hawaii, USA, and Development Planning Unit at University College London, UK. Mr. Islam taught in the Department of Geography and Environment, University of Dhaka, from 1963 to 2007, and in the Urban Development Planning at the Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok. Mr. Islam has served as Chairman of the University Grants Commission of Bangladesh from 2007 to 2011, the Chairman of the Board of Dhaka Water and Sewerage Authority (DWASA), and as a Member of several urban development-related committees formed by the Government. Mr. Islam is currently the National Policy Advisor for Urban Affairs, UNDP Bangladesh and is the Founder-Honorary Chairman of the Centre for Urban Studies (CUS), Dhaka.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 220
Philippe MadecArchitectMr. Madec is an architect and urban planner engaged in sustainable development and the environment from its early stages. Mr. Madec’s work, centered on an ecologically responsible approach, also reflects upon the social, economic and human factors involved in sustainable architecture. In 2000, Mr. Madec created the first French Department of Education on Sustainable Architecture at the National School of Architecture in Lyon. Mr. Madec has taught in universities worldwide (including Columbia University, the National School of Landscape Architecture in Versailles, the University of Montreal, Harvard University), and received the Global Award for Sustainable Architecture in 2012.
Valerie MbaiporInternational Program Development ProfessionalMs. Mbaipor, an International student assistant at the University of Maryland in Baltimore, USA is a strategy consultant in the Ivory Coast for the WFP, a gender-based violence expert for UNFPA, and a strategy consultant to the Ministry of Education of Chad. Ms. Mbaipor obtained a master’s of Sociology from the University of Manchester, UK and master’s in Sustainable Development, International Policy, and Management (from the SIT Graduate Institute and World Learning in Washington DC). Ms. Mbaipor has experience in supporting education system transformation and sustainability to maximize youth, women, community, and economic development in various organizations in African countries.
Ambreena ManjiProfessor of Land Law and Development, Cardiff UniversityMs. Manji held academic posts at the Universities of Warwick and Keele. Ms. Manji’s reputation for research leadership was established during her tenure as the Director of the British Institute in Eastern Africa (BIEA) in Kenya between 2010 and 2014. Ms. Manji has advised several international organizations on land issues, including the FAO and UNDP, and is on the Council of the African Studies Association of the UK. Ms. Manji serves on the research committee of the British Institute in Eastern Africa and is a board member of Social and Legal Studies and Feminist Legal Studies.
Isaac Frimpong Mensa-BonsuDirector of Plan Coordination, National Development Planning Commission of GhanaMr. Mensa-Bonsu helps in coordinating national, sector, and sub-national plan preparation. Mr. Mensa-Bonsu holds a bachelor’s degree (Hons.) in Development Planning from Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology in Ghana, a Master of Science degree in Urban and Regional Planning from Hokkaido University in Japan, and PhD in Environmental Science (Planning Option) from Hokkaido University. Mr. Mensa-Bonsu is a member of the governing boards of a number of state institutions including the Energy Commission, Ghana Railway Development Authority, Vice-Chairman of the board of Social Investment Fund and a member of the UNESCO National Committee on Man and the Biosphere.
Rosario PalaciosUniversidad Católica Sociology InstituteMs. Palacios is a national consultant for the Urban Development Council and Public Space Department, and a senior consultant to the Santiago City Government. Ms. Palacios is an Adjunct Assistant Professor of Sociology at the Universidad Católica de Chile. Ms. Palacios was awarded a PhD from the London School of Economics and Political Science and has conducted various research projects on urban culture at Santiago, Chile. Ms. Palacios’ main research interests are in citizen participation, informal work, public spaces, qualitative research methods, urban ethnography, and visual methodologies.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 21
Jordi PascualUnited Cities and Local GovernmentsMr. Pascual is the founding coordinator of the Committee on culture of the world organization of United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG). The Committee is focused in the implementation of Agenda 21 for culture (2004), the first global cultural-policy document for cities. Agenda 21 for culture emphasizes the interconnection among culture, sustainability, diversity, participation of citizens and governance. In 2015 UCLG approved “Culture 21 Actions”, a practical toolkit on Culture and Sustainable Cities. Mr. Pascual has been a member state of the jury of the European Capital of Culture (2010, 2011, 2013 and 2016). He teaches cultural policies and management at the Open University of Catalonia. Mr. Pascual is one of the leaders of the global campaign “The future we want includes culture” that struggled to include culture in the Sustainable Development Goals. The campaign approved three documents on “culture as a goal” (2013), “cultural targets” (2014) and “cultural indicators” (2015). Mr. Pascual was awarded a PhD in International Cultural Relations and European Cultural Policies from the University Pompeu Fabra and Interarts Foundation.
Mary RoweExecutive Vice president, The Municipal Art Society, New YorkMs. Rowe is the coordinator of Centre for City Ecology, Director at The New Orleans Institute of Resilience and Innovation, and Vice President of Urban Programs at Blue Moon Funds. Ms. Rowe has been awarded the Bellagio residency by Rockefeller Foundation, Bellagio, Italy and holds a bachelor’s degree in Political Science. Ms. Rowe has written publications on BP oil spills and sustainable designs.
Lourdes Ampudia RuedaProfessor, Universidad Autónoma de Ciudad de JuárezMs. Rueda is a lecturer at the Universidad Autonoma de Ciudad de Juárez, and a specialist on urban and regional economy with an emphasis on labor market and gender studies. Ms. Rueba worked as the Coordinator of Academic Development Support ICSA-UACJ, Sub-Director of Studies for Institutional Development, and is currently a PhD student in Urban Studies at the Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez.
Joseph SalukvadzaDepartment of Human Geography, Tbilisi State UniversityMs. Salukvadza is a lecturer and professor at the Department of Human Geography, Tbilisi State University, and was the head of that department 2000 and 2005. Ms. Salukvadza has conducted studies, consultancies, and projects with the World Bank, FAO, and other international entities, and specializes in human geography, land policy and land management, urban geography, and GIS.
Hans VerschureProfessor EmeritusMr. Verschure is professor emeritus with special assignments, at the K.U.Leuven, Post Graduate Centre Human Settlements (PGCHS), Department of Architecture, Urbanism and Spatial Planning. His specialties are training and capacity building, policymaking, research, and development and follow-up of projects in the domains of habitat, sustainable urban and rural settlement development, urban renewal and heritage conservation, spatial and environmental planning, in developing countries, more specifically in North-, East- and Southern Africa, the Caribbean and Latin-America, South- and South-East Asia. Mr. Verschure was for many years programme director of the international course programme ‘Master of Architecture in Human Settlements’ (1985-2007), and guest Professor at the Brussels University teaching “Environmental Planning and Policy”. Mr. Verschure has initiated and guided many development cooperation programmes for the Belgian Development Cooperation and for international agencies, including the major programme ‘Localising Agenda 21: Strategic Planning for Sustainable Development’, in cooperation with UN-Habitat, Nairobi and active in Kenya, Morocco, Vietnam, Cuba etc. Mr. Verschure participated in the Habitat I in Vancouver 1976 and in almost all World Urban Fora.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 222
Hamento Kusuma WidjajaArchitect, Rujak Center for Urban StudiesMr. Widjaja is a practicing architect, urban analyst, and activist advocating sustainable city and living solutions. Mr. Widjaja co-founded Rujak Center for Urban Studies (RCUS) in 2010 and has been its Director since. RCUS currently works with partners in seven different cities in Indonesia to encourage urban knowledge co-production as basis for improving urban policies. Mr. Widjaja collaborated with NGOs, communities, and community architects in building settlements in several places, including most recently in post-Yolanda Tacloban, the Philippines. Back in the early 2000s Mr. Widjaja was the team leader for UN-Habitat/UNDP City Development Strategy program in Indonesia. Mr. Widjaja is known in art scenes in parts of Southeast and East Asia and did his study at the architecture department of Parahyangan University in Bandung, Indonesia and at the Post Graduate Center Human Settlements of K.U. Leuven in Leuven.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 23
POLICY PAPER 2 SOCIO-CULTURALURBAN FRAMEWORK
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 226
Executive summary
We live in a world today that is increasingly urbanized and disrupted by political
and economic conflicts and climate change-related impacts. As the New Urban
Agenda looks to the future to guide the shape of cities for the next 20 years, this
Policy Unit looks at ways to humanize the New Urban Agenda. The present paper
is in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which recognizes
the need to “strengthen the efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural
and natural heritage” as a dedicated target of Sustainable Development Goal
11 (target 11.4). We focus at once on urban development that is socially and
culturally inclusive of all urban dwellers, as well as the potential of social forms
and cultural assets and identities to propel urban development that is more
sustainable and resilient socially, economically, and environmentally.
Vision. We envision cities where the social and cultural aspects of urban
life can contribute to inclusion and resilience, as well as cities that are more
people-centred and liveable. If urban areas are to truly serve as “engines of
growth”, reducing poverty and including all urban dwellers in the processes
and benefits of development are essential to making cities better for all. The
New Urban Agenda must promote inclusion of all urban dwellers, regardless of
citizenship, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, social or economic status,
or ethnic origin. This is particularly important for marginalized and vulnerable
groups, including refugees and migrants, who often feel excluded from urban
life. Our vision is that of cities and towns as safe for all their residents and
where culture forms and activities thrive and cultural diversity fosters peace
and social cohesion. Cities must integrate tangible and intangible cultural
heritage and creative practices with urban development built on the collective
intelligence of people recognizing and valuing the need for cultural actors
(artists, historians, heritage experts, cultural producers and managers, as well
as the media) to be involved in urban processes. Contrary to current modes
of urban development premised on homogenized and universalized models of
efficiency and economic rationality, the New Urban Agenda must emphasize
place-based urban development that is rooted in and shaped by the people
and communities that inhabit it. Spatial organization, patterns and design of
urban space can promote or hinder social cohesion, equity and inclusion. Social
and cultural infrastructure is as fundamental to making cities liveable as basic
infrastructure.
Policy challenges. The challenges to achieving such an urban vision are in
several dimensions. First, the benefits of urbanization are very unequally shared
and, in many contexts, a substantial proportion of urban dwellers are not able
to access them. Second, globalized and homogenized urban development
have diminished and threatened a plethora of diverse tangible and intangible
heritage in many cities around the world. Cultural diversity, including a range
of institutions, practices, world views, people, forms, experiences, languages
and knowledge systems, is being eroded or deliberately erased as communities
are assumed to be homogeneous and monolithic. Third, social exclusion is
reinforced by built environments that do not facilitate gatherings of people,
collective uses and the practice of different cultures within them. Informal
livelihood practices such as street vendors are penalized and criminalized while
segregation and social tensions increase through the development of gated
communities. Finally, migration and the sudden influx of large numbers of
displaced people into towns and cities pose a variety of challenges, but are also
enormous contributions to urban areas economically, socially, and culturally.
Migration is a global phenomenon that is transforming countries, cities and
towns around the world including transnational migration, refugees fleeing
conflicts and violence, or those internally displaced by disasters and climate
change. The contributions of migrants to urban life often remain illegal and
unrecognized, leaving them vulnerable and excluded.
Priority actions, policy design, implementation, monitoring and key actors. The priority actions for the New Urban Agenda identified by the Policy
Unit integrate culture and cultural heritage into urban development, safeguarding
cultural assets, and promoting cultural diversity; addressing migration of all types
from internal to international, voluntary to forced, and developing strategies
for including migrants in contributing to and benefiting from cities; reducing
urban violence and enhancing safety for all; planning and designing the built
environment and social infrastructure to mitigate segregation and exclusion
and enhance diversity in social, cultural, and economic activities. Towards this
end we see participatory processes of design, planning, and policymaking as
a critical transformative action that needs to be institutionalized in the New
Urban Agenda at all stages from problem identification to implementation,
monitoring, and evaluation. Education, capacity-building, and awareness for all
stakeholders are essential to enable robust participatory processes. Diversity
and inclusiveness in media and information and communications technology
(ICT) is also necessary to support engagement, information, and dialogue.
The priority actions we suggest can only be taken forward successfully by
the engagement of all key actors from public authorities at various levels of
government, and large scale industries to small businesses, non governmental
organizations (NGOs), and communities. Based on these priorities, we have
proposed illustrative policy designs with indicators and monitoring mechanisms
for community participation; city liveability; culture and cultural heritage in
urban development; education and capacity-building; media and technology;
migration and refugees; safety and violence; and finance, business, and real
estate.
Conclusion. We see the New Urban Agenda as an opportunity to consistently
and systematically put in place planning, design, and policymaking processes
that will lead to inclusive, people-centred and culturally sensitive urban
development paradigms. Therefore, the planning and design of cities and their
urban policies must empower and enable different social groups to overcome
systemic and institutional inequalities and vulnerabilities to make all urban
dwellers active agents in making and benefiting from their cities. Safeguarding
tangible and intangible cultural heritage, promoting cultural diversity and
integrating culture with urban development contributes towards the United
Nations Sustainable Development Goals of poverty alleviation, gender equality,
and cities that are safe, inclusive, resilient and sustainable. Culture contributes
to making cities sustainable as a driver of inclusive economic development;
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 27
an enabler for peace, social cohesion, inclusion and equity; and in promoting
the liveability and sustainability of urban areas. Through socially inclusive,
participatory, and culture-sensitive approaches to city design, planning and
policies, the New Urban Agenda must help to make the vision of sustainable
cities a reality.
I. Vision and framework of the policy paper’s contribution to the New Urban Agenda
1. How can the New Urban Agenda include sociocultural frameworks? What
are the key characteristics of such a perspective? How can a focus on
the social and cultural elements of urban life help to address the future
challenges of towns and cities, with special attention to the issues of
safety, migration, equity and equality?
2. Today’s towns and cities face challenges of social, cultural and spatial
exclusion, violence, uneven investment, destruction, and loss of tangible
and intangible cultural assets, in addition to broader threats related to
climate change and large-scale migration. These challenges are only set
to increase in severity.
3. The New Urban Agenda therefore presents an opportunity to drive
forward a vision of cities that are people-centred, inclusive, resilient and
safe; where cultural diversity is not only respected but promoted as a
foundation for the stability and sustainability of urban societies. This is a
vision of towns and cities as safe havens where all residents, regardless of
citizenship, social or economic status, are able to benefit from urban life;
where those who strive to contribute socially, economically and culturally
to their neighbourhood, town or city are able to do so; and for those who
seek sanctuary, can live in dignity, safety and with self-reliance, until
they are able to return home or another permanent solution is found.
It defines a city that integrates cultural heritage and creative practices
into urban development, built on the collective intelligence of people, and
where culture and cultural heritage foster peace and social cohesion, and
inclusive societies, while helping to counter urban violence.
4. This paper provides policy guidance on how attention to the social and
cultural aspects of urban life can contribute to inclusion and resilience as
well as cities that are more people-centred and simply more liveable.
A. Towards people-centred cities
5. There is no one model that can be promoted for urban areas, but there
is an “essence” to urban life. It is made up of a variety of elements,
including:
(a) Recognition of and respect for a diversity of cultural forms,
knowledge, and practices;
(b) Conviviality among people of different ethnic, social and income
backgrounds;
(c) Diversity of the built environment and layering of the old and the
new;
(d) Understanding of the dynamic and evolving nature of economies,
societies and the fabric of towns and cities;
(e) Opportunities for positive human interaction — with urban forms
and spaces as well as with other people.
6. These could be considered “urban sensibilities”. They can serve to
“(re)humanize” the city and act as a counterweight to homogenization,
exclusion and violence.
7. Urban sensibilities and everyday practices must be given due consideration
in the New Urban Agenda, as they contribute to making cities liveable and
productive. A focus on everyday practices and an understanding of urban
life can help to place people, rather than mere economic development,
at the centre of public policy and planning processes. Inclusion can also
be promoted through equitable investment in social infrastructure across
cities and towns.
8. Urban areas are often described as “engines of growth” but the promise
of poverty reduction and development will not be realized if the focus
remains purely on the economy and on returns on investment. The social
and cultural aspects of urban life — the way in which different groups
in society are able to engage with, contribute to and benefit from what
towns and cities have to offer — is equally important. This “use value”
of towns and cities must be recognized, protected and nurtured — as a
contribution not only to the fundamental well-being of urban dwellers in
its own right, but to productive and liveable urban societies.
B. Place-based urban identities
9. The New Urban Agenda can help to avoid the continuation of the trend
towards homogenization — where patterns of investment render towns,
and particularly larger cities, without a grounding in time or place and
serving as mere receptacles for capital investments. In many cities
around the world today, residential property is seen as a safety deposit
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 228
box, rather than homes for productive members of society embedded
in a social and cultural context. Sometimes this approach has resulted
in neighbourhoods of luxury buildings that are left largely uninhabited.
Similarly, gated communities limit interaction between people from
different walks of life. The stripping away of place-based identity and
the spatial segregation generated by these types of investments can
generate a sense of disenfranchisement from the city and urban society.
By contrast, building on the diversity of culture and heritage can help
foster peaceful and cohesive societies that serve to counter urban
violence.
C. Inclusive, safe and human-scale built environments
10. Urban cultural practices and sensibilities are thus intimately connected
with the built environment and how it promotes social interaction
and provides opportunity for different ways of living. There are built
environments that give room for culture to develop, and others that
asphyxiate cultural diversity and inclusion. The way in which we design,
invest in and use our built environment — the assets, systems, services,
spatial forms, patterns and designs that make up the city — can promote
or hinder social cohesion, equality and inclusion and, in turn, determine
how urban sensibilities and everyday practices are destroyed, preserved
or generated.
11. The built environment is also critical for ensuring safety and security,
through public spaces that support formal and informal cultural, social
and economic activities, protect from environmental threats, and provide
safety from crime and violence.
D. Cities conducive to social cohesion and respect for diversity
12. The built environment can facilitate the gathering of people and encourage
collective uses and the practice of different cultures. Fostering social
interaction and recognition of the diverse cultural practices within cities
enable mutual understanding and respect. Social encounter in public
space and the experience of sharing the same urban condition, as users
of the built environment, reinforces the feeling of safety and community.
All of these contribute to greater social cohesion. The New Urban Agenda
must promote inclusion of all urban dwellers, regardless of citizenship,
social or economic status, or ethnic origin. This is particularly important
for refugees and migrants, who are often among the most vulnerable.
Combatting xenophobia and stigma is critical, as is recognizing that
towns and cities have been built, not only on the labour of migrants, but
also on their social and cultural contributions. Migration flows have —
and will continue to — render urban areas dynamic, constantly evolving,
and centres of cultural diversity.
13. The New Urban Agenda must recognize the different ways in which
people inhabit and use the city, and demonstrate an appreciation that
towns and cities can reduce economic inequalities while enabling
greater inclusivity to the rewards and benefits of growth. Promoting
urban everyday practices and cultural diversity can therefore be seen as
a counterweight to the homogenization of the urban environment, and a
way to combat stigma, social exclusion and violence.
E. Culture-based urban development
14. Participative urban governance with respect to cultural producers is
paramount. The sociocultural urban framework is incomplete unless
cities and towns are able to promote concrete partnerships among
the public (mainly, the local governments) and cultural actors (artists,
historians, heritage experts, cultural producers and managers, as well as
the media). Cultural actors need to be recognized, valued and involved in
all processes related to sustainable urban development.
15. Tangible and intangible cultural assets and creative practices must
be integrated into urban development processes from inception to
implementation. Well-planned cities would have integrated cultural
heritage and activities in their master plans and strategic plans so that
the disruptive impact of development on heritage would have been
mitigated and the positive impacts enhanced.
16. When planned by its users, an urban environment takes into account
spatial practices and promotes safety, security and access to housing
and basic services. This should be facilitated by responsive urban
government, working in partnership with local populations.
II. Policy challenges
A. Persistent urban inequalities contribute to social and spatial fragmentation
17. Inequality remains an enduring challenge for towns and cities in the
twenty-first century. The benefits of urbanization are unequally shared
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 29
and, in many contexts, a substantial proportion of urban dwellers are not
able to access them. Privatization of public space, uneven investment
in assets and services, and gentrification can lead to displacement
and exclude whole groups of citizens. Those particularly affected are
ethnic minorities, lower income communities, refugees and migrants.
Among these groups, youth, women and elderly people can be doubly
disadvantaged. The main challenge for twenty-first century cities is
the equitable provision of urban (economic and social) services such
as transport, energy, water and sanitation, housing, and solid waste
management. At present, in many instances, the social structures and
spatial logic of urban areas are treated in isolation of one another. To
advance equity, inclusion, and safety in the city, the New Urban Agenda
must address the social fabric of the city alongside its infrastructure,
design and assets. Also, access to culture (libraries, heritage, creativity,
new media) should be given equal consideration if sustainable
transformation is to be taken seriously. Through a holistic approach, it
will be possible to make concrete progress towards equity, belonging and
safety in urban areas.
B. Increasing threats to urban heritage and cultural diversity undermine social cohesion and urban resilience
18. Given the link between culture, identity, and place making, another
challenge is to promote built environments that reinforce cultural diversity,
inclusion, equity, safety and social cohesion. Cultural heritage must be
taken into account if we want built environments that allow cultures
to thrive. In many cities around the world, the built cultural heritage is
threatened or neglected, and in danger of destruction. There is a lack of
inventories of cultural heritage and cultural producers, and a monopolized
mass media, which promotes a homogeneous image of towns and cities.
Cultural heritage is very narrowly defined in policies and implementation
and as a result, development projects are frequently pitted in opposition
to its preservation and to creative practices. While some elite or classical
performance and visual arts are supported in many countries, countless
other forms are being lost every day. In order to counter this, educational
programmes for arts and culture that address cultural diversity should be
developed.
19. Environmental degradation and natural hazards, as well as political and
economic conflicts, also contribute to the loss and destruction of the lived
heritage of cities and of cultural knowledge. The crucial importance of
cultural resilience in the face of disasters is largely overlooked in disaster
risk reduction and management.
C. Homogenization of urban environments threatens cultural diversity and promotes social exclusion
20. In a different vein, globalization and homogenization are not only resulting
in the standardization of built environments but also in cultural identities
and expressions being increasingly homogenized or being denigrated as
inferior. This is particularly the case of marginalized groups, including
refugees and migrants. Culture is by very nature contextual and
varies from people to people and from place to place. The challenge
is to strengthen diversity against tendencies to globalize or to reduce
cultural expressions to marketing products. Cultural diversity, including a
range of institutions, practices, world views, people, forms, experiences,
languages and knowledge systems, is being eroded or deliberately
erased as communities are assumed to be homogeneous and monolithic.
21. Similarly, social exclusion is reinforced by built environments which do
not facilitate gatherings of people, collective uses and the practice of
different cultures within them. Trends such as defensive architecture or
the privatization of public spaces must be rejected. Instead, mixed-use
zones for people of diverse origins and use of public spaces that are
accessible to all, as settings for livelihoods, especially for the working
poor, should be considered.
D. Lack of coherence between cultural and urban policies threatens urban sustainability
22. In most cities around the world, laws and policies around the safeguarding
and management of cultural heritage and creative production are
separate from those focused on urban development. This divergence
is detrimental to both the cultural assets and to sustainable urban
development.
E. Cultural rights remain overlooked or insufficiently respected
23. Human-rights based approaches to protecting and enjoying cultural
heritage and cultural and creative expressions are frequently overlooked.
In addition, cultural rights are poorly understood. On the one hand, some
abuses have led to the instrumentalization of culture in an attempt to
justify the violation of human rights. On the other hand, some approaches
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 230
aiming to defend human rights may be imposed without taking into
account cultural specificities. In accordance with the advance version of
the report of the Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights (February
2016), “the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (art. 4), further
stresses that no one may invoke cultural diversity to infringe upon human
rights guaranteed by international law, nor to limit their scope”. Cultural
rights “are firmly embedded in the universal human rights framework.
Hence, the implementation of human rights must take into consideration
respect for cultural rights, even as cultural rights themselves must take
into consideration respect for other universal human rights norms.”
F. Communities should be strongly supported to contribute to urban planning and management
24. On this issue, a further challenge is to ensure that communities engage
with and work alongside local authorities. To achieve this, people’s
capacity to contribute to the planning and management of towns and
cities must be enhanced through education focused on participation.
Government capacity for communication must also be increased, and
technical jargon removed from these processes. A core issue to be
addressed is to broaden the scope of citizen participation processes.
Urban dwellers must play a part in the decisions that relate to the
ecological, social, economic, political and cultural environment. Currently,
the most excluded from these processes are those with high levels of
vulnerability, including women and children, older people and people with
disabilities. This results in disregard for their needs in urban policies.
G. The built environment should be designed in ways that ensure security and foster inclusion
25. A further challenge for today’s towns and cities is to ensure that built
environments address safety in all its dimensions. This includes safety
from crime and violence, as well as protection from natural disasters
and environmental hazards caused by air and water pollution, lack of
sanitation and industrial accidents. An additional aspect of safety and
security in urban areas is related to the urban informal economy, without
which large swathes of the population would be even more vulnerable.
As such, steps must be taken to enhance and embrace the livelihood
practices of informal workers, rather than penalizing or criminalizing
informal workers and undermining or destroying their activities. In cities
around the world, street vendors have carved out space in what the
Self-Employed Women Association (SEWA) calls “natural markets” —
near transport hubs or public institutions — to sell goods to passers-
by. When these natural markets are destroyed and vendors are evicted,
economic diversity can also be severely affected. In the long run, this
can lead to greater insecurity in cities, since street vendors and informal
recyclers contribute to safety in public spaces. In sum, the challenge
is to overcome insecurity and violence in cities that result from social
exclusion, environmental hazards, and economic, social and political
inequality.
H. Building local capacities and harnessing human capital is a key challenge for cities
26. Many of today’s towns and cities also face the maximum brunt of the
negative impacts of globalization because of a web of issues related
to limited financing, limited government capacity, lack of data, lack of
integrated urban planning, unarticulated governance, including high levels
of corruption, and absence of necessary legal frameworks for supporting
cultural diversity. The role of municipalities should be encouraged and
strengthened by improving the human capital through diverse technical
staff that includes different expertise and professional training. Local
governments are the ones closer to people’s everyday life challenges and
aware of the cultural differences within their jurisdictions. They should
be empowered in order to ensure equal access to culture, education and
health-care services and social infrastructure for all citizens, provide job
opportunities and a diverse economic environment, and make diverse
cultural practices possible.
I. Access to cultural and communication resources remains insufficient
27. Promoting local media content provides a platform for sharing and
expressing local knowledge and experience, opening up avenues for
new creative expressions, exchange, interaction and understanding. In
taking a people-centred approach to urban development, the role of the
cultural and creative industries is of crucial importance, determining not
only how content is created, but how it is produced, distributed and used.
All inhabitants of cities should have access to the means of expression
and dissemination as guarantees of their cultural diversity.
28. Many States have adopted laws on commercial advertising and
marketing, but they remain mostly self-regulated. These practices have
an increasing bearing on the cultural and symbolic communication within
cities and more broadly on the cultural diversity of its inhabitants.
29. Audiovisual and communication outlets should be accessed and owned
by those who generate its content. Cities are faced with challenges when
they do not host or own such outlets and are thus unable to produce
their own cultural content and guarantee its dissemination. Furthermore,
while technology has generated new ways of bringing people together
and have opened up new development pathways for creative expression,
limits of access to these resources can create or compound existing
societal fragmentation and exclusion, in particular for marginalized or
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 31
vulnerable groups and individuals. The challenge is to build the necessary
conditions and mechanisms whereby access and participation in the
media, cultural and creative industries is not only broadened but ensured
at the local level.
J. The potential of migrations for urban development should be further recognized and enhanced
30. The challenge related to migration and displacement today is to make
towns and cities a place where new arrivals of people can contribute,
with their labour and culture, to urban development. Migration is a global
phenomenon that is transforming countries, cities and towns around
the world. While research demonstrates the positive contributions that
migrants can make to their host and home economies if their energies and
ambitions are tapped in positive ways, the contributions of international
migrants are often only measured in terms of the remittances they send
to their home countries. Migrants may not be integrated into the formal
economy, or perform jobs below their skill level. This is a particular
concern for female migrants, whose social and economic contributions
are often undervalued, and whose work may not be legally recognized.
31. Alongside the demographic shifts brought about by national, regional and
international labour migration, the world is also currently experiencing a
crisis of forced displacement, which is predominantly urban in nature.
More than half of all refugees and internally displaced people have
sought sanctuary in towns and cities. Forced displacement flows include
refugees fleeing conflict; refugees who have already sought asylum
in one country but have decided to seek a better future in another;
internally displaced people who have been forced to move because of
conflict and violence; and those who have moved internally or across
borders because of “natural” disasters and other climate-related events.
Recurrent events such as floods, droughts, cyclones and changes in
temperature and precipitation patterns can have a huge impact on rural
areas, where individuals and families are eventually obliged to move in
order to survive climate change-induced migration can be perceived as
both “slow onset, disaster-induced” and economic migration. What links
all these populations is the fact that the majority of them will end up in
urban areas — in developed and developing countries alike.
32. Over the years urban areas have absorbed migrants and other displaced
people, which has allowed them to be dynamic, constantly evolving and,
in many parts of the world, centres of diversity. As well as places of
potential opportunity, towns and cities should turn into places of sanctuary
for those fleeing violence, conflict and persecution. The Sustainable
Development Goals make specific reference to migrant and refugee
populations and they must be part of all efforts to promote peaceful and
inclusive societies, governed by non-discriminatory laws and policies
that promote sustainable development. Migrants and refugees often
find themselves the object of stigma, racism and xenophobic violence.
Where they are segregated from other urban populations and without
basic rights and entitlements, migrant and displaced communities may
resort to precarious or illegal livelihood options and housing solutions.
These vulnerabilities may be exacerbated by language barriers, lack of
familiarity with local norms and customs, social isolation and limited
awareness of their rights, entitlements or where to seek help.
33. Moreover, the vast majority of refugees worldwide seek safety in the
region neighbouring their place of origin, where hosting municipalities
may lack the means and capacities to respond adequately to migrants’
needs and deal with massive pressure on urban services that are used
and relied upon by refugees and host communities alike. For example,
short-term camp-based solutions can cause long-term problems: camps
become permanent, with very poor standards of living, disconnected
from vital city systems. However, outside of camps, the principal
alternative for refugees and internally displaced people who arrive
without assets (or once these are depleted) is to move to informal areas
of the city where they are exposed to natural and other hazards, including
environmental contamination. In situations where disasters displace
people from one part of the city to another, new informal settlements
may be spontaneously created without the assistance that could reduce
risk in the event of future disasters, or facilitate the eventual provision
of basic services to the area. For these reasons, towns and cities need
to be better prepared to absorb migrant and displaced populations in
ways that are safe and dignified. This should be incorporated into urban
planning frameworks and processes. The goal of inclusive, safe, resilient
and sustainable towns and cities must encompass all urban residents,
whether legally “citizens” or not.
III. Prioritizing policy options: transformative actions for the New Urban Agenda
34. The challenges of systemic social exclusion, violence and uneven
investment in urban areas, persistent poverty, the escalating frequency of
prolonged conflicts at the regional and local levels, as well as emerging
“disruptive” factors relating to climate change and large-scale migration,
demand that cities and towns integrate the social and cultural aspects
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 232
of urban life into local and national policy frameworks and actions. The
policy recommendations below will provide national, regional, and local
authorities with strategic guidance on priorities and policies to promote
cultural diversity and creativity, cohesive community identity, and ensure
safe, vibrant, inclusive and resilient built environments, in line with the
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which recognizes the need
to “strengthen the efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural
and natural heritage” as a dedicated target of Sustainable Development
Goal 11.
A. Prioritize participatory and people-centred policymaking processes
• Institutionalize citizen participation in urban development, regeneration,
and adaptive reuse decision-making processes to ensure the integration
of local knowledge and expertise, the safeguarding of historic landscapes
and a range of cultural landmarks (including grand monuments and
ordinary places that are culturally significant to local communities),
and an increase in policy ownership and effectiveness. This should also
include establishing participatory budgeting processes.
• Invest in a wide range of social infrastructure services, including formal
and informal public spaces, liveable streets, transportation and food
systems infrastructure and networks, to promote social connections and
community networks, enhance public safety, and retain cultural heritage
values, practices and assets.
• Evaluate and promote traditions and practices related to solidarity
systems, sharing of common land and goods, non-monetary exchange
systems, and ecological and resource-conserving practices (locally
produced foods, local materials and skills in construction, waste recycling
and reuse practices, water conserving practices, etc.).
B. Foster place-based and culturally sensitive urban governance
• Strengthen links between local urban contexts and priorities, national
frameworks, legislation and approaches to ensure that the diversity of
cultural heritage and on-the-ground realities are appropriately prioritized
in national and regional policies.
• Ensure that basic infrastructure designs prioritize the local context,
cultural heritage, and diversity of lived uses to retain a sense of place and
the cultural identity of cities and towns.
• Promote partnerships between public, private, civil-society and academic
stakeholders to catalyse innovative cooperation, knowledge exchanges,
and inclusive decision-making mechanisms.
• Guarantee transparent and accountable governance for cultural
infrastructure, particularly publicly funded infrastructure, including the
participation of civil society in governance bodies.
C. Incorporate culture and creativity in planning instruments and strategies
• Incorporate cultural heritage considerations in planning instruments,
including master plans, zoning guidelines, and strategic growth policies,
so as to safeguard a diverse range of tangible and intangible cultural
assets and landscapes.
• Include an “urban culture and heritage” priority policy or action in
urban strategies, particularly in all area-based urban regeneration and
development strategies (city centres, informal settlements, deprived
neighbourhoods), to ensure a sense of community identity and promote
social connections and better living standards of people living in those
areas.
• Guarantee that all local governments develop a long-term local cultural
plan with open participatory processes which is closely and operationally
linked to the long-term urban strategy.
• Incorporate culture in disaster risk reduction and climate change
resilience plans, notably local knowledge, traditions, and priorities
to safeguard the living heritage of neighbourhoods (built context) and
community identity (social context).
• Prioritize urban policies that accommodate and promote open, flexible,
and safe public spaces that catalyse innovation and experimentation in
all urban districts and neighbourhoods.
D. Promote access to culture and respect for cultural rights of all
• Recognize and guarantee access to cultural services as a basic urban
service (museums, art schools, libraries, theatres and monuments)
through adequate policies and institutional frameworks, so as to facilitate
social interactions and relationships, empower people and allow for
the expression of their cultural identities and the enhancement of the
community’s capacity to absorb, adapt and recover from a wide range of
climate, economic, political, and social impacts.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 33
• Implement a long-term programme for contemporary art, innovation and
experimentation, with adequate working spaces and community projects
in all urban districts and neighbourhoods, including public art.
• Promote in all cities and towns access to cultural rights and “the right
of all to participate in cultural life”, with a particular focus on freedom of
speech, the diversity of creative expressions and heritage.
• Address the tenure rights of indigenous peoples to ensure their rights
and promote diverse and inclusive economic development.
• Emphasize gender equality in cultural policies and programmes with a
view to recognizing, promoting and increasing the visibility and status of
women’s contributions to cultural activities.
E. Strengthen cultural components in education and capacity-building programmes and strategies
• Develop cultural educational programmes that account for a variety
of cultural and creative expressions, including heritage, and promote
visibility of cultural activities of historically marginalized and vulnerable
populations.
• Increase expertise in and awareness of sociocultural practices and
principles among local and national authorities to ensure that policies
safeguard and promote living cultural practices and heritage.
F. Broaden awareness and foster recognition of cultural diversity through media and technology
• Invest in basic telecommunication infrastructure to enable local media
and community commentators to share local cultural heritage and
community identity stories via multiple platforms, including TV, radio, print
and Internet to help create a sense of community and engage a wide
range of urban dwellers.
• Ensure diverse local media, including private and public broadcasters of
all sizes, to promote the integration of cultural diversity and public opinion
into local decision-making processes.
• Use social media to raise awareness of acute urban sociocultural issues
and initiate discussions on culture-related projects and programmes,
including plans for the rehabilitation/renovation of particular sites,
neighbourhoods, public open spaces and cultural landscapes.
• Make ICT and digital communication accessible to artists and cultural
producers, especially women, marginalized and vulnerable persons.
G. Recognize and foster the potential of migration for urban development
• Acknowledge that migration is an inevitable phenomenon, be it
international, internal, voluntary or forced, and ensure that towns and
cities are able to absorb additional populations in ways that are dignified
and contribute to longer-term sustainable urban development.
• Ensure that towns and cities can provide a safe haven for refugees and
other forcibly displaced people by providing assistance and advice to new
arrivals, promoting their self-reliance and encouraging their incorporation
into the community. It further requires city-level public campaigns to
change negative perceptions of migrants and displaced people.
• Ensure that urban planning processes respond to changing migration
patterns and take into consideration their impact on local sustainable
urban development. Planning processes should also ensure that small
and medium-sized urban centres are able to absorb additional migrant
and displaced populations, so as to reduce the pressure on densely
populated capitals and other large cities. Similarly, emergency response
to large-scale migration movements should be informed by longer-term
planning and sustainable development concerns.
• Enable the contribution of displaced people to local and national
economies by supporting their integration into the formal labour market.
• Facilitate forcibly displaced people’s access to services and legal support
through national and local policies, in collaboration with international
actors where appropriate (particularly with regards to tenure and rental
agreements), and provide information on rights, entitlements and
available services in ways that are accessible to people from different
backgrounds and languages.
• Ensure sufficient support to cities and municipalities that host forcibly
displaced people (refugees, internally displaced people) by providing
financial transfers that enable them to deal with additional pressure on
urban services, building their capacity to respond to displacement crises
and engaging them in the formulation and implementation of migration
and refugee policies.
• Introduce concepts of migration and displacement into related university
curricula, such as urban planning.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 234
H. Ensure security and counter urban violence through urban policies
• Contribute to safer cities and the right to the city by improving police
and security services with a view to protecting vulnerable populations,
including migrants and refugees, from violence and persecution.
• Recognize the contribution to local economy and public safety of street
vendors and others whose livelihoods depend on access to public
space and ensure that they are able to pursue their livelihoods without
harassment.
• Create or strengthen social capital through the promotion of alternative
business models such as cooperatives based on solidarity and
collaboration.
IV. Key actors for action: enabling institutions
35. The implementation of the proposed policy recommendations not only
requires the involvement of a wide range of actors but is also contingent
upon the effective coordination of these actors and alignment of the work
carried out at the national and local levels.
A. Central government/national authorities
• Ensure that legal frameworks are established to facilitate citizen
participation and which are reflected in national and local budgets.
• Invest in towns and cities to ensure social infrastructure and cultural
heritage for all.
• Establish spaces for dialogue to promote national policies, and to ensure
that local governments’ perspectives are heard.
B. Local government/authorities
• Strengthen the involvement of different actors in participatory processes
at the local level.
• Promote safety and inclusion in towns and cities through legal frameworks
that foster cultural diversity, different work practices and uses of public
spaces, particularly for marginalized and vulnerable groups, such as
women, migrants and refugees.
• Reinforce local responsibility for planning, zoning and master plans, and
investment in cities.
• Strengthen alignment between local and national frameworks. This
should be carried out through integrating urban design work, social and
cultural programmes and initiatives within national frameworks, and
ensuring that decisions on services and infrastructure at the national
level are adapted to local needs and demands.
• Ensure that local government staff promote the diversity of the urban
area, building on their understanding of the social dynamics, cultural
heritage and creative assets of their towns and cities to support the
integration social and cultural factors into planning and public life.
C. Civil society
• Relevant civil society actors and groups (NGOs, grass-roots organizations,
neighbourhood groups, volunteers, faith-based organizations, community
leaders, advocacy groups, unions and relevant professional associations,
among others) should lead participatory processes and demand space
for dialogue with local and central governments.
• Strengthen engagement with communities, develop demands, visions
and proposals for the built environment, and support urban practices,
inclusion, capacity-building and the safeguarding of tangible and
intangible cultural heritage.
• Recognize and foster the role of local community groups in creating,
activating and implementing social and cultural priorities in towns and
cities. Community actors also play an active role as local mediators and to
bridge gaps between local people and formal institutions and authorities.
• Drive communication on disaster risks and safety issues in towns and
cities.
D. Academia
• Support the promotion of and transmission of cultural practices.
• Engage in policy design and implementation through schools of urban
planning, human geography, and sociology, among others.
• Support evidence-based decision-making by providing analyses based
on research and systematic studies/surveys of sociocultural processes
that take place in urban areas.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 35
E. Media
• Promote cultural heritage and the diversity of cultural expressions.
• Leverage technology as a tool to support local communities and diverse
cultural groups.
• Participate in agreements to promote diverse contents and ways of
designing and using public spaces.
F. International organizations
• Strengthen policy actions for conserving cultural heritage, diversity of
cultural expressions and promoting towns and cities for all (UN-Habitat,
UNESCO and ILO and urban observatories).
• Ensure that work in migration and displacement is adapted to the urban
context and undertaken in collaboration with local governments and civil
society (UNHCR, IOM and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs of the Secretariat).
• Support investments in cultural heritage and creative expressions (IDB,
World Bank, and regional banks such as CAF-Development Bank of
Latin America, among others).
G. Private sector
• Adhere to established legal frameworks for actions in towns and cities,
and develop initiatives through public-private partnerships or other
forms of collaboration.
V. Policy design, implementation and monitoring
36. The priority actions identified for the New Urban Agenda seek to integrate
culture and cultural heritage with urban development, safeguard cultural
assets, and promote cultural diversity, together with addressing voluntary
and forced migration and developing strategies for their inclusion, reducing
urban violence and enhancing safety for all. These actions should not
only be taken forward through multi-stakeholder engagement, but also
through participatory processes of design, planning, and policymaking.
These are critical transformative actions that need to be institutionalized
at all stages from problem identification to implementation, monitoring
and evaluation, and supported through education, capacity-building, and
awareness-raising.
37. National and local governments should draft policy guidelines that
incorporate ways to introduce and strengthen citizen participation. These
processes and mechanisms (including councils, committees, forums,
etc.) should be implemented and opportunities to engage should be
made public. Citizenship education programmes are crucial to these
efforts.
38. Effective planning and design of the built environment and social
infrastructure will be crucial to mitigate segregation and exclusion and
to enhance diversity in social, cultural, and economic activities. Similarly,
diversity and inclusiveness in media and ICT will serve as key constituents
in supporting engagement, information and dialogue.
39. Participatory monitoring mechanisms should include diverse stakeholders
(including women, local minorities, marginalized groups, etc.). Progress
reports should be made available to all citizens on a regular basis.
40. Nationwide implementation and systematic maintenance of “urban
indicators” (such as a city liveability index) should be established, with
a special focus on measures to respect cultural diversity and diverse
social groups, to achieve gender equality, safer cities, and promote and
safeguard culture, and the inclusion of migrants and refugees. “Urban
indicators” (see Urban Indicators Guidelines; Monitoring the Habitat
Agenda and the Millennium Development Goals, 2004) should include:
(a) Percentage of gender representation in all participatory
mechanisms;
(b) Increase/decrease of safety in cities;
(c) Number and type of heritage (material and non-material
conservation actions undertaken);
(d) Indicators to assess increase of inclusive educational programmes
focusing on culture, social innovation, safer cities, newcomers,
migrants, refugees, and in general underprivileged groups in
society;
(e) Number, type and quality of actions undertaken to assist migrants
and refugees.
41. A broad range of social, economic, political, environmental, cultural and
physical considerations must be taken into account to realize the vision of
liveable cities and towns for all. The prioritizing of policy options in section
III put forth principles, frameworks, and actions that promote: rigorous
involvement of stakeholders in decision-making processes, integration of
cultural education and cultural heritage capacity-building programmes,
protection of open media, communication, and development of urban
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 236
design and land use policies that include migrants, refugees and ensure
open, green, flexible, safe and resilient built environments.
42. Achieving such a vision must be supported by establishing clear policy
recommendations and guidelines for policy design, monitoring and
evaluation. This implies a set of indicators. These indicators should aim at
measuring: the management of programme and policy implementations;
the identification of good practices and shared knowledge; and
transparency, accountability and innovation.
43. In accordance with these priorities, the following proposed policy designs,
indicators and monitoring mechanisms serve to strengthen: community
participation; planning and policymaking; culture and cultural heritage
policy design; media and technology; migration and disadvantaged
groups; safety and counter-violence measures; policy design and
financing and implementation. The table below provides guidelines for
policy design and monitoring with suggested indicators (process and
structural indicators).
Category Design Indicators Monitoring
Community participation
National, regional and local authorities create policy guidelines and metrics to introduce, integrate and strengthen community participation in urban public policy development, design and implementation
– Number of community participatory mechanisms and decision-making bodies, such as councils, committees, commissions, boards and coalitions developed and supported by authorities annually
– Number of women, low-income community members, populations with disabilities and other vulnerable groups represented in participatory mechanisms and decision-making bodies
– Number of public meetings, charrettes and open houses held during policy design and implementation processes
– Number of community-driven collaborative processes supported by national, regional and local authorities
– Quarterly reporting on the indicators to measure progress of participatory mechanisms
– Annual reports on the results yielded by indicators to ensure proper documentation and transparency
– Update indicators annually to ensure relevance and consistency with community values
Planning and policymaking
Creation of urban and social indicators based on a city liveability index (inclusive of gender equality and safety in cities)
– Number of urban liveability indices created, tailored to the local context and adopted locally by cities and towns
– Number of inclusive educational programmes focusing on culture, social innovation, safer cities, newcomers, migrants, refugees and underprivileged groups as a whole
– Number, type and quality of actions undertaken to assist migrant and refugee integration in cities and towns
– Number of social indicators, such as health, education, crime and physical environment integrated into urban policies
Quarterly reporting on cities and towns that have adopted a liveability index
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 37
Category Design Indicators Monitoring
Culture and cultural heritage policy design
– Detailed, comprehensive inventories and mappings of cultural heritage to be undertaken with the participation of local communities to identify diverse, meaningful sites beyond buildings and protected landscapes typically listed by national and state agencies
– Detailed, comprehensive inventories and mapping of intangible heritage to be undertaken with the participation of local communities to identify a diversity of practices and knowledge, and include these in all development plans for sustainable towns and cities
– Increase citizen awareness (particularly youth and newcomers) and appreciation of the cultural heritage of their towns, cities and regions
– Local knowledge, tangible and intangible heritage, and measures to promote creativity are to be included in all urban development plans
– Enforce legislation and define substantial punitive measures to stop the wilful destruction of cultural heritage and places of cultural value, including landscapes, green areas, regardless of whether they are privately or publicly managed
– Develop master/strategic urban development plans, which clearly indicate all cultural assets, including buildings, sites and landscapes, and clarify indigenous peoples’ tenure rights, claims to traditionally common rights of access, etc. and enforce the protection, respect for and preservation of such cultural valuables
– Evaluate accessible, decentralized and well-resourced cultural infrastructures, including museums and monuments, but also art schools, libraries, theatres and occasional sociocultural activities, such as festivals at the city and neighbourhood levels
– Establish training programmes for public school teachers and community leaders to apply the plans
– Establish programmes for post-disaster reconstruction that capitalize on and reinforce local practices
– Stimulate public educational institutions to establish “arts and culture” education programmes. These programmes are ideally negotiated between the local communities (people, local government and civil society) and the educational authorities (local and national)
– Number of cultural heritage education and capacity-building programmes developed and implemented
– Regular participatory inventories and mappings of cultural heritage in cities and towns
– Number of informal and formal public spaces in cities and towns
– Inventories of tangible and intangible cultural heritage published and widely distributed
– Number of violations concerning the destruction of cultural heritage
– Number of inclusive educational programmes focusing on culture, social innovation, safer cities, newcomers, migrants, refugees and underprivileged groups as a whole
– Heritage and cultural impact assessments, routinely carried out for development proposals
– Access to all types of cultural activities (such as museums, theatre, festivals) is to be improved by drastically reducing the price of events (certainly those subsidized by public funding), so as to encourage participation among low/no income groups
– Number of development projects designed to enhance the cultural life of the city
– Annual land-use and development report to include the growth or decline of cultural heritage sites
– Inventories are to be regularly updated and their distribution evaluated
– Monitor increase in percentage of low/no income groups that participate in cultural activities
– Monitor the impact of tourism on cultural heritage in order to ensure its sustainability by preventing the destruction of the cultural assets of towns and cities through their excessive use or commodification
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 238
Category Design Indicators Monitoring
Media and technology – Support the promotion of local media (TV stations, community radio, local press, Internet), which create a real “local meaning” for citizens
– Stimulate the openness and independency of local media so as to maintain a diversity of sources of information and opinions
– Establish control measures to guarantee that such local media reflect and analyse urban processes in a professional and relevant manner
– Encouragement of diversity by local governments through private and public broadcasters, while ensuring that the voice of small broadcasters reaches all citizens
– These plans are to be developed for short-term decisions as well as for long-term planning. Moreover, such plans include a long-term programme for contemporary art, innovation and experimentation, with adequate spaces/antennas in all urban districts and neighbourhoods. In addition, it will include open source and Internet provided by local governments
– Freedom of expression, of press and access to information of public decisions are to be legally enforced
– Annually reported and recorded access to and increased use of social media, particularly by underprivileged groups
– Number and diversity of active local community media outlets
– Assess the accessibility of social media, and innovative technologies in libraries, community centres, social restaurants in particular
– Assess the increase of social innovation activities, particularly those accessible to young people, small enterprises, artists and underprivileged groups
– Distribution of resilience and preventive plans and dissemination of information on such plans through various media
– Increase in the number of training programmes and learning processes, and updating of information
– Number of schools, households, etc. that have been actively informed of such plans
– Assess participation of local media in development of benchmarks and indicators of cultural heritage and knowledge-sharing policies on annual basis
– Local governments have published plans with clear urban cultural dimensions (detailing support to arts, to heritage and to various cultural activities) integrated in overall development plans. The plans will include how local media are proactive and employ new technologies to embrace and propel local cultures into the public sphere of a city and to reach and engage with a wide variety of citizens. Regularly monitor the increased use and access, particularly by elderly people, disadvantaged groups, newcomers and otherwise often “forgotten” social groups
– Independent local media, not controlled by governments
– Monitor freedom of expression and press, and access to public decision-making information
– Establish ombudsman/mediating service if violations or monitoring do not yield sufficient results
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 39
Category Design Indicators Monitoring
Migrants, refugees, displaced persons and disadvantaged groups
Preparation of legal framework, institutional set-up and guidelines by countries and local governments/municipalities for improved assistance to migrants, refugees/displaced persons and disadvantaged groups
– Number of legal frameworks/institutional frameworks and guidelines in place and operational
– Publish budget and other assistance for the hosting of internally displaced people/refugees that municipalities receive (financial support and necessary facilities) from the State
– Publish institutional set-up and support programmes for migrants and refugees annually, and show the percentage increase
– Publish percentage of migrant and refugee unemployment and compare it to the total average in the town and city
– Assess number of refugees/migrants living in informal areas/structures
– Evaluate access to utility provisions: drinking water, sewer system, gas/heating, electricity, etc. of the migrant/refugee population
– Measure percentage of refugees/migrants with access to accessible education and health-care facilities
– Assess and monitor cultural policies and programmes for their inclusiveness, taking into account the promotion of gender equality
– Prioritize strategies to place the issue of gender equality at the centre of cultural policies, with a view to recognizing, promoting and increasing the visibility and status of women’s contributions to cultural activities. Monitor the number of youth and disadvantaged groups that take part in cultural activities and develop measures to improve their participation
– Refugees and migrants enjoy the same rights of employment and income as the average mainstream population
– Refugees and migrants live in acceptable conditions, not separated/isolated from the main population, have sufficient utilities, basic social services
– Update educational programmes at all levels to include issues on migration, displacement, refugees, etc. in curricula, and increase such issues particularly for all civil servants, academics, professionals and practitioners likely to have to deal with these groups
Safety and violence prevention
– Prepare resilience and preventive plans to cope with natural and man-made disasters
– Establish programmes post-disaster reconstruction practices that capitalize on and reinforce local practices (traditional and newly locally developed)
– Safer cities measures are adopted and integrated in all future urban planning efforts. These include resilience, disaster prevention and mitigation, safer public places, police and community vigilance, promoting reporting on violence, particularly as related to women, children and in general to underprivileged groups
– Establishment of accurate database on various types of crimes
– Distribution of resilience and preventive plans and dissemination of information on such plans through various media
– Number of training programmes and learning processes specifically on resilience and disaster prevention
– Type and places of crimes are recorded and regularly published
– Percentage of the police and security force trained in human rights showing year-to-year improvements
– Human rights section included in code of conducts of policy and security forces
– Percentage reduction in reports on violence and/or deaths showing year-to-year improvements
– Monitor application and updating of all resilience and disaster prevention plans
– Monitor creation of human rights chapters; number of reported torture and/or deaths and number of training courses implemented at police and military academies
– Make reporting of crimes an easy and accessible tool to monitor evolution
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 240
Category Design Indicators Monitoring
Policy design, financing and implementation
– Local governments to include minimum 3 per cent of budget to arts and cultural activities, with publicly clear and transparent information, and accountable monitoring undertaken by non-political and independent assessments within local civil society
– Inclusion of stringent measures to respect and protect cultural heritage by all public tendering and disbursement of public funds
– Land speculation by public authorities and private developers is discouraged so as to control prices of land and rent, with a view to increasing accessibility to basic infrastructure and services for underprivileged people in urban areas
– Highly encourage corporate social responsibility and promote various types of social innovation, particularly focusing on initiatives by starters, by not-exclusively-for-profit enterprises, by newcomers, and by more sustainable resource-conserving modes of production/distribution/reuse
– Provide financial support to towns and cities that welcome refugees and internally displaced people with additional basic services
– Solicit sponsorship and assistance from the private business community to support programmes for refugees and internally displaced people
– Publish public budget spent on arts, creative activities, etc. and the methods of distribution
– Include efforts to annually increase budget for social and culture-related activities
– Publish private contribution and sponsoring on arts and creative activities, and their yearly increase
– Take stock of and widely publish the variety of new socioeconomic initiatives (month-by-month inventory)
– Rent and sales are regularly checked for whether they match with inflation, and excessive increases are indicated and questioned/investigated
– Land prices, prices of property sales and rent are regularly published
– Publish budgets specifically allocated to host refugees and internally displaced people
– Monitor all public tendering to include all the above as stringent assessment criteria
– Monitor efficiency of (micro)financing
– Control all public spending so as to guarantee the effective increase and outreach of social and cultural activities, both formal and informal. Such effectiveness is not to be based primarily on economic efficiency but rather on creativity, multiplication effect and outreach to disadvantaged groups
– Monitor the number of refugees and internally displaced people, and the budget spent on welcoming the groups and monitor changes
– In numbers and in basic services provided
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 41
VI. Conclusions
44. The New Urban Agenda is an opportunity to shape socially, culturally,
economically and politically inclusive cities. Moving forward from past
views of cities as problems, cities should be considered as dynamic
spatial configurations that provide opportunities for everyone to engage
in shaping them and in achieving their aspirations. We emphasize the
need to recognize both tangible and intangible heritage as part of the
“layering” of cities and urban forms, meanings, and identities. At the same
time, contemporary, creative and forward-looking, innovative approaches
are necessary to better integrate culture with sustainable development.
The New Urban Agenda presents an opportunity to consistently and
systematically develop planning, design, and policymaking processes
that will lead to inclusive, people-centred and culturally sensitive urban
development paradigms.
45. Therefore, the planning and design of cities and their urban policies
must:
(a) Promote people-centred cities:
(i) Empower and enable different social groups to overcome
systemic and institutional inequalities and vulnerabilities to
render all citizens active agents and participants of urban
life;
(ii) Catalyse culture-based activities and cultural diversity to
boost social interaction and community engagement in
place making;
(iii) Humanize cities through culture to enhance their liveability
and empower people to connect with their communities and
shape their urban environments;
(iv) Foster cultural liveliness, which makes cities and urban
spaces meaningful to people, enhancing social interaction
and liveability. In turn, cities that are rich in social
infrastructure and public spaces nourish cultural production
and consumption.
(b) Target poverty alleviation:
(i) Safeguard and nurture culture-based livelihoods both
traditional and contemporary;
(ii) Help alleviate poverty and managing economic transitions by
enhancing the cultural assets and human potential of cities;
(iii) Support the diversity of formal and informal economic
activities, social interactions, cultural forms and practices,
governance mechanisms, spatial arrangements, housing
solutions, and infrastructural services.
(c) Foster safe and inclusive cities:
(i) Ensure safe and secure environment in cities so that
everyone, including women, marginalized, vulnerable, and
displaced people, can live, work, and participate in the urban
life of cities without fear of violence and intimidation;
(ii) Build on the diversity of culture and heritage to foster peace
and intercultural dialogue, and counter urban violence.
(d) Develop sustainable built environments:
(i) Nurture and promote cultural diversity and creativity in
identity, expressions, built environment, urban development,
regeneration, and adaptive reuse;
(ii) Ensure access to basic infrastructure and affordable
housing for all urban dwellers, including the poor, women,
youth, elderly, the disabled, marginalized and vulnerable
communities such as migrants, in order to enable cultural
diversity so people can be active cultural producers and
consumers;
(iii) Help create mixed-use inclusive public spaces, both formally
designated and designed as well as those that become
informal public spaces that provide necessary opportunities
for social integration and culture-based activities. A variety
of public places are necessary in cities to enhance liveability
and to leverage culture and creativity to foster social
cohesion and participation in urban decision-making.
(e) Encourage inclusive policies and urban governance:
(i) Ensure that statutory and legal provisions are introduced and
implemented on a human rights-based approach to enable
socially inclusive and culturally vibrant cities;
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 242
(ii) Strengthen commitment to relevant United Nations
resolutions;
(iii) Improve urban governance by enabling and strengthening
participation and engagement of all groups of residents in
decision-making processes, from identifying challenges and
potentials to evaluating and monitoring interventions;
(iv) Promote investment in social and cultural infrastructure
at various scales that promote social interactions and
safeguards tangible and intangible cultural heritage and
creative practices.
46. In line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and in
particular Goal 11 on sustainable cities and target 11.4, the New Urban
Agenda should integrate the aforementioned policy recommendations
to harness the power of sociocultural frameworks for inclusive, safe,
resilient and sustainable cities.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 43
POLICY PAPER 2
ANNEXES
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 246
Annex I
Key reference documents
Adamo, S. B. (2010). Environmental migration and cities in the context of global
environmental change. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, vol. 2,
No. 3, pp. 161-165.
Ampudia, L. (2013) “Empleo y estructura económica en el contexto de la crisis
económica en Ciudad Juárez: las amenazas de la pobreza y la violencia”. La Realidad Social y las violencias. Laurencio Barraza, Hugo Almada, eds.. Ciudad
Juárez, pp. 93-138.
Ampudia, L. and Camberos M. (2016). Mercado laboral: Ocupación, salarios e
informalidad (coords.) Primera edición, 2016 Universidad Autónoma de Ciudad
Juárez, colaboraciones de la Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila, Centro de
Investigaciones de la Alimentación y el Desarrollo, Sam University, Universidad
Autónoma Metropolitana. México.
Betts, A., Bloom L., Kaplan J., and Omata N. (2014). Refugee Economies: Rethinking Popular Assumptions, Oxford: University of Oxford Humanitarian
Innovation Project.
Beyani, C. (2014). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of
internally displaced persons. New York, United Nations General Assembly
A/69/295.
Black, R., Adger, W. N., Arnell, N. W., Dercon, S., Geddes, A. and Thomas,
D. (2011). The effect of environmental change on human migration, Global Environmental Change, vol. 21, pp. S3-S11.
Callon, M. (1999). The Role of Lay People in the Production and Dissemination
of Scientific Knowledge, Science, Technology and Society, vol. 4, No. 1, pp.
81-94.
Collins, T. W., Grineski, S. E. and Aguilar, M.L.R. (2009). Vulnerability to
environmental hazards in the Ciudad Juarez (México) — El Paso (USA)
metropolis: A model for spatial risk assessment in transnational context. Applied Geography, vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 448-461.
Crawford, N., Cosgrave, J., Haysom, S. and Walicki, N. (2015). Protracted displacement: uncertain paths to self-reliance in exile, London: Overseas
Development Institute.
Dessein, J., K. Soini, G. Fairclough and L. G. Horlings (eds.). (2015). Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development: Conclusions from the COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability. Finland: University of Jvaskyla.
Dias, S. (2015) Hybrid Economies, Hybrid Cities — Key to the Future of Places.
In: Future of Places Conference, Stockholm, 2015.
Duneier, M. and Carter, O. (1999). Sidewalk. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Duxbury, N. (ed.) (2013). Animation of Public Space through the Arts: Toward More Sustainable Communities. Coimbra: Almedina.
__________ (2014). Culture and sustainability: How new ways of collaboration
allow us to re-think our cities [English]/Cultura y sostenibilidad: Cómo las
nuevas formas de colaboración permiten replantearnos nuestras ciudades
[Spanish]. Observatorio Cultural (Cultural Observatory), National Council for
Culture and the Arts of Chile.
Duxbury, N., Cullen, C. and Pascual, J. (2012). Cities, culture and sustainable
development. In H. K. Anheier, Y. R. Isar and M. Hoelscher (eds.), Cultural Policy and Governance in a New Metropolitan Age. The Cultures and Globalization
Series, Vol. 5., pp. 73-86. London: Sage.
Duxbury, N., and Jeannotte, M. S. (2012). Including culture in sustainability:
An assessment of Canada’s integrated community sustainability plans.
International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 1-19.
__________ (2015). Making it real: Measures of culture in local sustainability
planning and implementation. In M. Badham, L. MacDowall, E. Blomkamp and
K. Dunphy (eds.), Making Culture Count: The Politics of Cultural Measurement. pp. 145-161. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Duxbury, N., Hosagrahar, J., and Pascual, P. (2016). Why must culture be at
the heart of sustainable urban development? Agenda 21 for culture. Barcelona:
United Cities and Local Governments.
Falser, M. and Juneja, M., (2013). Kulturerbe und Denkmalplege Transkulturell. Grenzgänge zwischen Theorie und Praxis. Transcript Verlag, Bielefeld.
Fung, A. and Wright, E.O. (2001). Deepening Democracy: Innovations in
Empowered Participatory Governance. Politics and Society, vol. 29, No. 1,
March 2001, pp. 5-41.
Girard, L. F. (2011). Creativity and the human sustainable city: Principles and
approaches for nurturing city resilience. In L. F. Girard, T. Baycan, and P. Nijkamp
(eds.), Sustainable City and Creativity: Promoting Creative Urban Initiatives, pp.
55-96. London: Ashgate.
Gosse, M. (2011). Le Tiers-Livre de l’Architecture, éditions Bruxelles: UNIBOOK.
Harvey, D. (2005). El “nuevo” imperialismo: Acumulación por desposesión, Socialist register 2004 (enero 2005). Buenos Aires: CLACSO.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 47
Hawkes, J. (2013). Shaping policies: Culture-sensitive and context-based
policies in sustainable development. Address at the Hangzhou International
Congress, “Culture: Key to Sustainable Development”, 15-17 May 2013,
Hangzhou, China.
__________. (2001). The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability: Culture’s Essential Role in Public Planning. Melbourne: Common Ground.
Hooper, A. (ed.). (2005). Culture and Sustainable Development in the Pacific.
Canberra: ANU ePress and Asia Pacific Press.
Hosagrahar, J. (2012). Culture: A Driver and an Enabler of Sustainable
Development. Thematic Think Piece for UNESCO. United Nations System Task
Team on the Post-2015 United Nations Development Agenda.
Hosagrahar, J. (2013). Culture’s contribution to achieving sustainable cities.
Background Note 3A-C for Culture: Key to Sustainable Development, Hangzhou
International Congress, Hangzhou, China.
__________. (2012a). Integrating Culture and Development: Framing UNESCO’s Engagement with Culture and Development. Paris: UNESCO.
__________. (2014). Recommendation on historic urban landscapes:
Relevance in India. Context: Built, Living, Natural, 10(2), Winter/Spring, pp. 19-
26. 10th Anniversary Issue on World Heritage.
Hosagrahar, J. (2016, forthcoming). A history of heritage conservation in
city planning. Planning History Handbook, C. Hein (ed.). New York, London:
Routledge.
Hosagrahar, J. and Hayashi, N. (2013). Cultural approaches to addressing
poverty. Background Note 2A for Culture: Key to Sustainable Development, Hangzhou International Congress, Hangzhou, China.
Hosagrahar, J., Fusco Girard, L., Soule, J., and Potts, A. (2016). Cultural
Heritage, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, and the New
Urban Agenda: ICOMOS Concept Note on Cultural Heritage and Sustainable
Development. Paris: ICOMOS.
Hristova, S., M. Dragicevic Šešic, and N. Duxbury (eds.). (2015). Culture and Sustainability in European Cities: Imagining Europolis. London: Routledge.
International Federation of Arts Councils and Cultural Agencies (IFACCA), United
Cites and Local Governments (UCLG), Committee on Culture, International
Federation of Coalitions for Cultural Diversity, and Cultural Action Europe.
(2013). Culture as a Goal in the Post-2015 Development Agenda. Available
from: http://media.ifacca.org/files/cultureasgoalweb.pdf.
IOM (2015). World Migration Report: New Partnerships to Manage Mobility.
Switzerland: International Organization for Migration.
IOM, ESCAP, ILO, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF, UNIFEM (2008). Situational report on the international migration in East and South-East Asia. Bangkok,
Regional Thematic Working Group on Migration including Human Trafficking.
Jacobsen, K. (2006). Refugees and asylum seekers in urban areas: a livelihoods
perspective. Journal of Refugee Studies, 19(3), 273-286.
Kirchberg, V., and S. Kagan (eds.) (2013). City, Culture and Society, vol. 4, No.
3. Special issue on “The Sustainable City and the Arts.”
Leonie Sandercock (2003). Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities in the 21st Century.
London: Continuum.
Lerner, J. (2014). Urban Acupuncture, 2014, Washington DC: Island Press.
Llera, Francisco (2015). “Ciudad e interacción urbana” Bases teórico —
prácticas para los estudios urbanos, Cd. Juárez, Chihuahua, México.
Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A. and Taylor, J. E.
(1993). Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal. Population and development review, pp. 431-466.
McDowell, C. and De Haan, A. (1997). Migration and sustainable livelihoods: A critical review of the literature. IDS (Institute of Development Studies) Working
Paper 65.
Meyer-Bisch, P. (2013). Cultural rights within the development grammar.
Agenda 21 for Culture. Barcelona: United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG).
Moulaert, Frank, et al. (eds.) (2013). The International Handbook on Social Innovation. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Muggah, R. (2012). Researching the Urban Dilemma: Urbanization, Poverty and Violence, Ottawa: International Development Research Centre (IDRC).
Nadarajah, M., and A. T. Yamamoto. (eds.) (2007). Urban Crisis: Culture and the Sustainability of Cities. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
OECD (2014). Is migration good for the economy? Migration Policy Debates
No. 2. Paris: OECD.
Ostendorf, Y. (2015, August). Creative Responses to Sustainability: Cultural
Initiatives Engaging with Social and Environmental Issues. Singapore Guide.
Singapore: Asia-Europe Foundation.
‘ ‘ ‘
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 248
Padilla, H.; Olivas, C.; Alvarado, L. (2014). Ciudad Juárez y la necesidad de política, de la ciudad real a la ciudad ideal. Universidad Autónoma de Ciudad
Juárez, Primera edición, Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, México.
Pascual, J. (2009). Culture and Sustainable Development: Examples of
Institutional Innovation and Proposal of a New Cultural Policy Profile. Agenda 21 for culture, Report 4. Barcelona: United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)
________. (2006). Exploring local policies for cultural diversity. In Local Policies for Cultural Diversity. Agenda 21 for culture, Report No. 1. Barcelona:
United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)
Sen, A. (2000). Culture and Development. World Bank Tokyo Meeting, 13
December 2000.
Shaheed, F. (2014). Reflections on culture, sustainable development and
cultural rights. International Award UCLG — City of Mexico — Culture 21,
UCLG. Available from: http://www.agenda21culture.net/images/a21c/awards/
winners/art_FS2_ENG.pdf.
Shields, R., (2013). Spatial Questions: cultural topologies and social spatialisations. London: SAGE Publications.
Soini, K., and I. Birkeland. (2014). Exploring the scientific discourse on cultural
sustainability. Geoforum, No. 51, pp. 213-223.
UNESCO. (2013). The Hangzhou Declaration: Placing Culture at the Heart of Sustainable Development Policies. Paris: UNESCO. Adopted in Hangzhou,
People’s Republic of China, 17 May 2013.
UNESCO. (2014). Culture for Development Indicators: Methodology Manual. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2015). Culture: Key to a successful transition towards the sustainable
development goals. News release, 10 July 2015. Available from: http://www.
unesco.org/new/en/media-services/single-view/news/culture_key_to_a_
successful_transition_towards_the_sustainable_development_goals/#.
VaUrhMYYTfg.
UNESCO. (2015). Hangzhou Outcomes on Culture for Sustainable Cities.
Outcome document of UNESCO International Conference on Culture for
Sustainable Cities, Hangzhou, China, November 2015.
UNESCO. (2016 forthcoming). Global Report on Culture for Sustainable Urban Development: Report for UN-Habitat III. Paris: UNESCO.
UN-Habitat and CAF. (2014). Construction of More Equitable Cities: Public Policies for Inclusion in America Latina, Nairobi and Caracas. Available from:
http://unhabitat.org/books/construction-of-more-equitable-cities.
United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG). (2010). Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development. Policy Statement approved by the UCLG Executive
Bureau, Mexico City, 17 November 2010.
United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG). (2015). Culture 21: Actions?
Commitments on the Role of Culture in Sustainable Cities. Approved at the first
Culture Summit of the UCLG, Bilbao, 18-20 March 2015.
United Nations (2008). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples. 07-58681-March 2008 -4,000.
United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II). (1996). The
Habitat Agenda: Istanbul Declaration on Human Settlements. Available from:
http://www.un-documents.net/hab-ag.htm.
United Nations Task Team on Habitat III. (2015, May). Habitat III Issue Paper 4
— Urban Culture and Heritage. New York, 31 May 2015. Available from: http://
unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Habitat-III-Issue-Paper-4_Urban-
Culture-and-Heritage-2.0.pdf.
United Nations. (2014). Open Working Group proposal for Sustainable
Development Goals. Available from: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/
focussdgs.html.
Vázquez-Angulo Gilberto; et. al. (2012). Characterizing climate changes risks
and informing adaptation strategies in the Ciudad Juarez-El Paso metropolitan
region based on spatial analyses of extreme heat-vegetation abundance-
population vulnerability relationships. Dinámicas locales del cambio ambiental global. Sánchez, E. and Díaz, E.R., (eds.). Mexico: Universidad Autónoma de
Ciudad Juárez, Chih.
Verschure, H. (2016). The Productive City, key-note, ISOCARP International
Conference Antwerp+Rotterdam, 2015, published in Dutch version in RUIMTE, VRP (Journal of Flemish Spatial Planners), 2016, Brussels.
Verschure, H., Tuts, R., and al. (eds.) (2004). Urban Trialogues, Visions, Projects, Co-productions. Localizing Agenda 21. Leuven, Brussels and Nairobi: KU
Leuven and UN-Habitat and Belgian Development Cooperation, WHO and
United Nations Habitat, 2010 Hidden Cities: Unmasking and overcoming health
inequities in urban settings. Available from: http://www.who.int/kobe_centre/
publications/hidden_cities2010/en/.
Relevant links
http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/images/
CulturePovertyWellbeingENG.pdf.
https://huairou.org/sites/default/files/Resilient%20Women_web.pdf. Huairou
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 49
Commission, 2015. New York, USA.
http://wiego.org/resources/inner-thekwini-regeneration-and-urban-
management-programme-itrump-warwick-junction-experie.
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.
aspx?NewsID=15864&LangID=EPU2 HABITAT III POLICY PAPER.docx.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/images/a21c/articles/documentos/
newA21C_Lucina_Jimenez_Eng.pdf.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/images/a21c/bones_practiques/pdf/
MEDELLIN-ENG_def.pdf.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/images/a21c/bones_practiques/pdf/
VAUDREUIL-DORION-ENG.pdf.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/images/a21c/articles/documentos/Culture_
SD_cities_web.pdf.
http://wiego.org/sites/wiego.org/files/publications/files/Chikarmane_WIEGO_
PB8.pdf.
http://wiego.org/sites/wiego.org/files/publications/files/Dias_WIEGO_PB3.pdf.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/images/a21c/articles/documentos/Culture_
SD_cities_web.pdf.
http://www.culturalsustainability.eu/conclusions.pdf.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/images/a21c/articles/documentos/a-
PatriceMeyer-Bisch-NewA21C-ENG.pdf.
http://culture360.asef.org/wpcontent/blogs.dir/1/files/2015/11/Sustainability_
SG_Guide_Web_151120.pdf.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/index.php/docman/agenda21/17-
report1exenpdf/file.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/index.php/docman/agenda21/241-
report4full.
http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/voddocs/354/688/sen_tokyo.pdf.
http://www.agenda21culture.net/images/a21c/awards/winners/art_FS2_ENG.
pdf.
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf.
POLICY PAPER 2
APPENDICES
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 252
Appendix A. Policy Units selection process and criteria
HABITAT III POLICY UNITS
SELECTION PROCESS AND CRITERIA
BACKGROUND
In the framework of the preparations towards Habitat III, a total of ten Policy Papers on relevant topics will be developed by Policy Units (each Policy Unit will develop one Policy Paper) composed of 20 experts each, coming from different geographic areas and constituencies. The main objectives of this will be:
// To bring together high-level expertise to explore state-of-the-art research and analysis on specific themes;
// To identify good practices and lessons learned; and
// To develop policy recommendations on particular issues regarding sustainable urban development.
The ten Policy Units will focus respectively on the following ten topics:
Right to the City, and Cities for All;Socio-Cultural Urban Framework;National Urban Policies;Urban Governance, Capacity and Institutional Development;Municipal Finance and Local Fiscal Systems;Urban Spatial Strategy: Land Market and Segregation;Urban Economic Development Strategies;Urban Ecology and Resilience;Urban Services and Technology; andHousing Policies.
IDENTIFICATION OF EXPERTS
The process to identify experts for the composition of ten Policy Units will include the following steps:
"# Request to Member States to officially propose, to the Secretary-General of the Conference, suitable experts to be partof specific Policy Units.
1.
2.3.
4.5.
6.7.
8.9.10.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 53
To this aim, a letter was sent on 8 May 2015 to all Member States.
2. Request to accredited stakeholders to officially propose, to the Secretary-General of the Conference, suitable experts to be
part of specific Policy Units.
To this aim a letter to all ECOSOC, Habitat II, and specially accredited organizations will be sent.
In addition to the accredited organizations, the Habitat III Secretariat in consultation with Bureau Members may invite other
international organizations, recognized for their contributions to specific Policy Units’ topics, to propose suitable
experts. The Habitat III Secretariat is not limiting the number of nominated experts.
3. The Habitat III Secretariat will also request the UN Task Team, building on the work done for the preparation of IssuePapers, to propose suitable experts to be part of specific Policy Units.
[See Terms of Reference for Experts]
CRITERIA OF SELECTION
Based on the proposals received, the Secretary General will appoint 20 experts for each Policy Unit. The selection, conducted in close consultation with the Bureau of the Preparatory Committee for Habitat III, will be based on the following criteria:
// DEMONSTRABLE COMPETENCE The candidate should be able to demonstrate a highly recognized competency at the level of work experience and production of research/studies on subjects directly related to the topic of the Policy Unit. To this aim, research and publications issued on the topics, relevant work experience, and participation and engagement in other intergovernmental processes and/or global development frameworks will be considered and evaluated.
// GEOGRAPHICAL BALAN C E The selection will strive to ensure a fair balance on the geographic origin of the experts in order for all five geographic regions to be fairly represented in each unit.
// GENDER BALANCE Whenever possible and depending on the availability of suitable candidates, the selection will ensure that male and female are equally represented in all the units.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 254
In addition to the above, careful considerations will be made, as relevant, on ensuring the diversity of approaches and sub-thematic focuses. When necessary, other mechanisms such as interviews could be carried out during the selection process.
The selection will be nominative based on the above criteria.
As part of the nominations, the Habitat III Secretariat is expecting to receive the CVs of experts.
CO-LEAD ORGANIZATIONS
Each Policy Unit will be co-led by two organizations appointed by the Secretary-General of the Conference. The organizations willing to co-lead a Policy Unit will be selected in close consultation with the Bureau of the Preparatory Committee for Habitat III, based on the following criteria:
// International scope of the organization and high level demonstrable recognition in the subject area and/or specific topic of the Policy Unit; // Priority will be given to international organizations that can demonstrate participation and engagement in other intergovernmental processes and/or global development frameworks; and // Diversity in their constituent groups.
[See Terms of Reference for Co-lead organizations]
FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY
The cost of the Policy Units has been calculated in approximately 2.5 Million USD, including travel for two meetings (and one virtual meeting), the Habitat III Secretariat support and travel, the documentation, publication of documents, translation in six official UN languages, and the technical support for the open consultations. Each Policy Unit would cost 250,000 USD. Member States and other potential donors are being approached for contributing to the Habitat III Trust Fund.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 55
HABITAT III POLICY UNITS
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR CO-LEAD ORGANIZATIONS
Each Policy Unit will be co-led by two organizations appointed by the Secretary-General of the Conference, upon selection by the Secretary-General of the Conference in close consultation with the Bureau of the Preparatory Committee for Habitat III.
Organizations should be nominated to co-lead Policy Units based on the following criteria:
// International scope of the organization, and high level demonstrable recognition in the subject area and/or specific topic of the Policy Unit; // Participation and engagement in other intergovernmental processes and/or global development frameworks; // Diversity in their constituent groups; and // Geographical balance.
Policy Unit co-leaders can be nominated by Member States, stakeholders recognized by the UNECOSOC, and Habitat II accreditations, and specially accredited organizations.
Based on the proposals received, the Secretary-General will appoint 20 organizations to co-lead ten Policy Units.
STARTING DATE: September 2015
CLOSING DATE: 29 February 2016 (involvement until the end of the Habitat III process might be requested at the later stage)
DUTIES AND RESPONSABILITIES OF CO-LEADERS
In close collaboration with the Habitat III Secretariat:
§ Coordinate contribution on substantive documents prepared by selected Policy Unit experts;§ Coordinate preparation of a detailed structure of the draft Policy Papers;§ Support analysis of the available data, including available statistics, information available in Habitat
III Issue Papers, outcomes from official Regional and Thematic Meetings, etc.§ Support presentation of the structure and the preliminary contents and messages of the Policy
Papers at Expert Group Meetings;§ Coordinate meetings organized online; and
Appendix B. Terms of reference for co-lead organizations
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 256
§ Submit draft and final deliverables of respective Policy Units to the Secretary-General of the Conference.
BENEFITS AND EXPENSES
The work of co-lead organizations is on voluntarily basis. The Habitat III Trust Fund will cover travel expenses and associated daily allowances for the two planned Expert Group Meetings.
The working language will be English.
CALENDAR
§ September 2015: work of experts starts. Introduction, orientation kit, background documents,strategic framework for each Policy Unit, decisions on each group on calendar of Expert GroupMeetings, operational arrangements, etc.
§ October 2015: first Expert Group Meeting§ November 2015: second Expert Group Meeting§ December 2015: first draft of the ten Policy Papers (as established by PrepCom2)§ January 2016: written comments by Member States and stakeholders submission period§ February 2016: final presentation of the ten Policy Papers§ Virtual meetings may take place within the period of work of the Policy Unit
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 57
Appendix C. Terms of reference for Policy Unit experts
HABITAT III POLICY UNITS
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR EXPERTS
Organizational setting
Habitat III is the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development to take place in October 2016. In resolution 66/207 and in line with the bi-decennial cycle (1976, 1996, and 2016), the United Nations General Assembly decided to convene the Habitat III Conference to reinvigorate the global commitment to sustainable urbanization, to focus on the implementation of the “New Urban Agenda”, building on the Habitat Agenda of Istanbul in 1996.
The objective of the Conference is to secure renewed political commitment for sustainable urban development, assess accomplishments to date, address poverty, and identify and address new and emerging challenges. The Conference will result in a concise, focused, forward-looking, and action- oriented outcome document.
The Conference is addressed to all Member States and relevant stakeholders, including parliamentarians, civil society organizations, regional and local government and municipality representatives, professionals and researchers, academia, foundations, women and youth groups, trade unions, and the private sector, as well as organizations of the United Nations system and intergovernmental organizations.
Habitat III will be one of the first UN global summits after the adoption of the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda. It offers a unique opportunity to discuss the important challenge of how cities, towns, and villages are planned and managed, in order to fulfill their role as drivers of sustainable development, and hence shape the implementation of a new global development agenda and climate change goals.
Policy Units
As part of the preparatory process for Habitat III, several initiatives are being developed in order to serve as technical inputs for the preparation of the outcome document, including the Policy Units. Each out of ten Policy Units will be composed of 20 technical experts working in academia, government, civil society, and regional and international bodies, among other fields.
Policy Units are intended to identify challenges, policy priorities, and critical issues as well as the development of action-oriented recommendations for the implementation of the New Urban Agenda. The issues discussed by each Policy Unit, and the ten Policy Papers prepared, will serve as technical inputs for Member States’ consideration in the preparation of the outcome document of the Conference.
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 258
The main objectives of the Policy Units are:
// To bring together high-level expertise to explore state-of-the-art research and analysis on specific themes;
// To identify good practices and lessons learned; and
// To develop policy recommendations on particular issues regarding sustainable urban development.
The ten Policy Units will focus respectively on the following ten topics:
Right to the City, and Cities for All;Socio-Cultural Urban Framework;National Urban Policies;Urban Governance, Capacity and I nstitutional Development;Municipal Finance and Local Fiscal Systems;Urban Spatial Strategy: Land Market and Segregation;Urban Economic Development Strategies;Urban Ecology and Resilience;Urban Services and Technology; andHousing Policies.
The Policy Unit co-leaders
Each Policy Unit is co-led by two organizations appointed by the Secretary-General of the Conference, upon selection by the Secretary-General in close consultation with the Bureau of the Preparatory Committee for Habitat III.
In close collaboration with the Habitat III Secretariat, the Policy Units co-leaders:
Coordinate contribution on substantive documents prepared by selected Policy Unit experts;Coordinate preparation of a detailed structure of the draft Policy Papers;Support analysis of the available data, including available statistics, information available in Habitat III Issue Papers, outcomes from official Regional and Thematic Meetings, etc.Support presentation of the structure and the preliminary contents and messages of the Policy Papers at Expert Group Meetings;Coordinate meetings organized online; andSubmit draft and final deliverables of respective Policy Units to the Secretary-General of the Conference.
1.
2.3.
4.5.
6.7.
8.9.
10.
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 59
The Habitat III Secretariat The Habitat III Secretariat is the main focal point for the Policy Unit experts and works closely with the Policy Unit co-leaders in ensuring the coordination of the elaboration of the Policy Papers.
The Policy Unit experts Selected experts will be home-based.
Starting date: 1 September 2015 Closing date: 29 February 2016 (involvement until the end of the Habitat III process might be requested at the
later stage) Duties and responsibilities:
§ Contribute to reviewing substantive documents prepared for the Post-2015 process, and other relevantintergovernmental conferences;
§ Support the analysis of the available data, including available statistics, information available in Habitat IIIIssue Papers, outcomes from official Regional and Thematic Meetings, etc.;
§ Support preparation of the structure and the preliminary contents and messages of the Policy Papers at the first andsecond Expert Group Meetings (EGM1 and EGM2);
§ Participate in the meeting organized online and other virtual exchanges;§ Advise on incorporating proposed changes into the draft Policy Papers, harmonize Policy Papers, and submit it to
the Habitat III Secretariat.
Benefits and expenses: The work of experts is on voluntarily basis. The Habitat III Trust Fund will cover travel expenses and associated daily allowances for the two planned expert group meetings. The working language will be English.
Calendar:
§ September 2015: work of experts starts. Introduction, orientation kit, background documents,strategic framework for each Policy Unit, decisions on each group on calendar of expert group meetings,operational arrangement, etc.
§ October 2015: first Expert Group Meeting§ November 2015: second Expert Group Meeting§ December 2015: first draft of the ten Policy Papers (as established by PrepCom2)§ January 2016: written comments by Member States and stakeholders submission period§ February 2016: final presentation of the ten Policy Papers§ Virtual meetings may take place within the period of work of the Policy Unit
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 260
Appendix D. Policy Paper Framework template
Expected Accomplishment
Activities Scope Outcome
Review of the Habitat III Issue Papers
Review/ analysis of key publications/documents
Identification of examples/projects/practices
Identify research and data
Establish a criteria for identifying policy priorities
Define key transformations to achieve by policy priorities
Identify conditions or external factors favourable for the success of the policy priorities
Establish indicators of successful implementation, monitoring and evaluation
Policy design, implementation and monitoring
Analyse financial resources required and instruments for their sustainability
Analyse linkages with the Agenda 2030
HABITAT III POLICY UNIT ‐ POLICY PAPER FRAMEWORK
Problem definition is established after an analysis and assessment of the state and trends regarding the issues of the specific policy unit.
Identify the policy priorities and critical issues for the implementation of a New Urban Agenda Policy options are established and a criteria to prioritize them in terms of impact and
transformation is created
Create targets for those policy priorities
1. Challenges
2. Priorities
3. Implementation
Local level, national level, stakeholders ...
Other specificities: type of country (small island, landlocked…), type of city (intermediate, megalopolis…), specific
area (tropical zone, subregion…)
Identify challenges, including structural and policy constraints
Develop action‐oriented recommentations Identify key actions at all levels of implementation
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 61
Expected Accomplishment
Activities Outputs
a.1. Main recommendations to take into account from the issue paper
a.2. Disagreements/controversy
1. Challenges1.1. Identify challenges, including structural and
policy constraints
a. Review of the Habitat III Issue Papers
HABITAT III POLICY UNIT ‐ POLICY PAPER FRAMEWORK (CHALLENGES)
b. Review/ analysis of key publications/documents
b.1. Bibliography / Key documents
c. Identification of examples/projects/practices
c.1. List of examples/projects/practices
d. Identify research and data
d.1. SDGs targets and indicators related
d.2. List of other indicators to be taken into account
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 262
Expected Accomplishment
Activities Outputs
2. Priorities
2.1. Identify the policy priorities and critical
issues for the implementation of a New Urban Agenda
a. Establish a criteria for identifying policy priorities
b. Define key transformations to achieve by policy priorities
HABITAT III POLICY UNIT ‐ POLICY PAPER FRAMEWORK (PRIORITIES)
c.1. List of external factors
a.1. List of criteria
b.1. List of key transformations
c. Identify conditions or external factors favourable for the success of the policy priorities
d. Create targets for those policy priorities
d.1. List of targets
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 63
Expected Accomplishment
Activities Outputs
c.1. Indicators of success
c.2. Monitoring mechanisms
c.3. Linkages with the Agenda 2030
HABITAT III POLICY UNIT ‐ POLICY PAPER FRAMEWORK (IMPLEMENTATION)
b.1. Financial resources
c. Establish indicators of successful implementation, monitoring and evaluation
b. Analyse financial resources required and instruments for their sustainability
3. Implementation3.1. Develop action‐
oriented recommentations
a. Identify key actions at all levels of implementation
a.1. Key actions
HABITAT III POLICY PAPER 264
Appendix E. Policy Paper template
United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development
Policy Paper Template 25 pages [Calibri (Body)/ font 11]
Executive Summary: This section summarizes the key issues, contents, objectives, and strategic directions covered by the respective Policy Units. [2 pages]
1. Vision and Framework of the Policy Paper’s Contribution to the New Urban AgendaThis section provides guiding principles, global norms, and frameworks (e.g. SDGs) that link to the New UrbanAgenda. [2 pages]
2. Policy ChallengesThis section discusses key policy issues and challenges and also provides analyses and assessments of the statesand trends of the thematic areas covered. [4 pages]
3. Prioritizing Policy Options – Transformative Actions for the New Urban AgendaThis section identifies policy priorities and critical recommendations for the implementation of the New UrbanAgenda, criteria for the policy priorities, and targets. [5 pages]
4. Key Actors for Actions – Enabling InstitutionsThis section identifies key actors such as central and local governments, academia, civil society organizations, privatesector and social movements, and others to transform policy priorities to actions that will contribute to theachievement of the New Urban Agenda. [5 pages]
5. Policy Design, Implementation, and MonitoringThis section addresses operational means to implement policy recommendations, including possible financingoptions and monitoring instruments. It discusses analysis of linkages with the 2030 Agenda. [5 pages]
6. ConclusionThis section summarizes the key messages, highlighting the new opportunities for action in realizing the New UrbanAgenda. [2 pages]
Annexes: Policy Paper Framework Other annexes to be considered such as case studies
SOCIO-CULTURAL URBAN FRAMEWORK 65
Appendix F. Web links to Policy Unit 2 background documents
Policy Paper 2 Framework http://habitat3.org/wp-content/uploads/PU2-HABITAT-III-POLICY-PAPER-FRAMEWORK.pdf
Comments received by Member States to the Policy Paper 2 Framework http://habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda/preparatory-process/policy-units/
Argentina Brazil Colombia Ecuador European Union and Member States Finland Germany Japan Mexico Netherlands (the) Norway United States of America (the)
Comments received by stakeholders’ organizations to the Policy Paper 2 Framework http://habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda/preparatory-process/policy-units/
Habitat International CoalitionHelpAge InternationalInternational Council for ScienceTECHOWorld Resources Institute
www.habitat3.org